# Roosevelt....the Un-Reagan



## PoliticalChic

And now for the education that government schooling skipped.

*Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*


1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.



What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?

It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?



3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
 Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?


Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
Here is his timeline of political education..

Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.

In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.

1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.

Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.

Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.

On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.



So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.

He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.


What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Read FDR's Folly, he was an asshole


----------



## Pete7469

Obozo is the UnWashington.


----------



## rightwinger

Reagan was no FDR

Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall

FDR kicked the fucking wall down


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

rightwinger said:


> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down



Au contraire, he gave Unka Joe everything he wanted, and helped build the Iron Curtain.


----------



## PoliticalChic

SassyIrishLass said:


> Read FDR's Folly, he was an asshole





And this:

*"New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America"*
by Burton W. Folsom Jr.


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> ...On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.



Ah, another reason why FDR is evil, he recognized the Sovjet Union....

Funny, you think the British are evil too for recognizing the US as an independent state?


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down





I understand your undying devotion to the myth....indoctrination has a certain indelibility.

And this explains why you

a. can find nothing in the OP to disagree with.

and

b. will be unable to find anything in the rest of the thread what you can handle with any more than the usual Liberal "is not, is nootttttttt!" whine.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, another reason why FDR is evil, he recognized the Sovjet Union....
> 
> Funny, you think the British are evil too for recognizing the US as an independent state?
Click to expand...




And, of course, post #8 applies doubly to you.


Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?


Could be this?
"Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
Coulter


----------



## rightwinger

How Reagan brought down a wall







How FDR brought down a wall






The difference between a "good" president and a GREAT president


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?
> 
> 
> Could be this?
> "Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
> Coulter



You complain about lack of substance and then you quote Ann Coulter......

Too bad you conservative cultists don't do irony


----------



## rightwinger

How Reagan fought WWII






How FDR fought WWII


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?
> 
> 
> Could be this?
> "Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
> Coulter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You complain about lack of substance and then you quote Ann Coulter......
> 
> Too bad you conservative cultists don't do irony
Click to expand...




For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?

If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII





WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.

As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.

But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.


1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”

2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”

3.  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





Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Shall I wait for your response to the perfectly constructed and documented post #14....of shall I go on with a long and fulfilling life?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Did FDR know of the deceitful, homicidal nature of communism?

On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union.


4.*Yes, he knew.*
Eight months prior to FDR's recognition of the Soviet empire, journalist Gareth Jones had exposed Stalin's Terror Famine:
"In the train aCommunistdenied to me that there was a famine. I flung a crust of bread which I had been eating from my own supply into a spittoon. A peasant fellow-passenger fished it out and ravenously ate it."
Gareth Jones journalist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


b. Malcolm Muggeridge "was the first writer to reveal *the true nature of Stalin's regime when in 1933 *he exposed *the terror famine in the Ukraine."*
Amazon.com Time and Eternity The Uncollected Writings of Malcolm Muggeridge 9781570759055 Malcolm Muggeridge Nicholas Flynn Books


c. So FDR knew of the Terror Famine...designed and perpetrated by 'Uncle Joe,'...yet he *enveloped Joe Stalin in " the cloak of his popularity..."  *Time Magazine, December 17, 1934.

OK....so *Roosevelt knew the nature of the other side when he offered the partnership....entry into the accepted world community.*
There can be no doubt that Roosevelt knew.




"Bully Pulpit" an important public position that allows a person to express beliefs and opinions to many people  Definition of BULLY PULPIT

Note carefully how FDR used the 'Bully Pulpit."...it wasn't to expound American values, as the great man, Reagan did......was it.


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?
> 
> If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.



As a socialist I'm not in the habit of sponsoring book sales of right wing hatemongers. I believe I already told you that. But I've seen enough of her quotes to be familiar with her way of "reasoning".

Besides that, you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
Click to expand...

 
Give up yet?

My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes

<hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Shall I wait for your response to the perfectly constructed and documented post #14....of shall I go on with a long and fulfilling life?


You fail due to not understanding the reasons for holding and folding, which FDR understood. He spent the mid and late 1930's motivating and funding small programs that allowed the MIC to develope new and modern aircraft and ships, including a new class of aircraft carrier. By 1940 the private industry was ready to begin producing the weapons that would win the coming war. 
Producing weapons that were already obsolete would have been very studpid.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

rightwinger said:


> How Reagan brought down a wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR brought down a wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference between a "good" president and a GREAT president



FDR fortunately had the smarts to permit the military to prosecute the war, unlike the current idiot.


----------



## IcebergSlim

PoliticalChic said:


> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?


Were you and your kin homeschooled?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?
> 
> If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a socialist I'm not in the habit of sponsoring book sales of right wing hatemongers. I believe I already told you that. But I've seen enough of her quotes to be familiar with her way of "reasoning".
> 
> Besides that, you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?
Click to expand...



1. So....we have ascertained that you are expert at the government schooling technique of slandering those about whom you have no knowledge....if they don't toe the Liberals line.

a. As you have no knowledge of same, let me verify for you that all of her books are scholarly and perfectly documented.


2. "...you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?"
Let me answer the question with a question:

Did the nascent United States carry on a genocide against it's citizens, as the Soviet Union did?


September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933,*all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated*.
Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained,*starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly*.
NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.


'Lazar Kaganovich (together with Vyacheslav Molotov) participated with the All-Ukrainian Party Conference of 1930 and were given the task of implementation of the *collectivization policy that caused a catastrophic 1932–33 famine known as the Holodomor. *He also personally oversaw grain confiscations during the same time periods.

'Similar policies also inflicted enormous suffering on the Soviet Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan, the Kuban region,Crimea, the lower Volga region, and other parts of the Soviet Union. As an emissary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Kaganovich traveled to Ukraine, the central regions of the USSR, the Northern Caucasus, and Siberia demanding the acceleration of collectivization and repressions against the Kulaks, who were generally blamed for the slow progress of collectivization.'
Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



Did I just prove you to be a moron, or what????


----------



## IcebergSlim

PoliticalChic said:


> Jantje_Smit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?
> 
> 
> Could be this?
> "Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
> Coulter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You complain about lack of substance and then you quote Ann Coulter......
> 
> Too bad you conservative cultists don't do irony
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?
> 
> If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.
Click to expand...

Queen Ann?
Daughter of Federal employee.
Product of Public High School and public State Law School?


----------



## IcebergSlim

PoliticalChic said:


> Jantje_Smit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?
> 
> If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a socialist I'm not in the habit of sponsoring book sales of right wing hatemongers. I believe I already told you that. But I've seen enough of her quotes to be familiar with her way of "reasoning".
> 
> Besides that, you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1. So....we have ascertained that you are expert at the government schooling technique of slandering those about whom you have no knowledge....if they don't toe the Liberals line.
> 
> a. As you have no knowledge of same, let me verify for you that all of her books are scholarly and perfectly documented.
> 
> 
> 2. "...you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?"
> Let me answer the question with a question:
> 
> Did the nascent United States carry on a genocide against it's citizens, as the Soviet Union did?
> 
> 
> September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933,*all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated*.
> Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained,*starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly*.
> NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.
> 
> 
> 'Lazar Kaganovich (together with Vyacheslav Molotov) participated with the All-Ukrainian Party Conference of 1930 and were given the task of implementation of the *collectivization policy that caused a catastrophic 1932–33 famine known as the Holodomor. *He also personally oversaw grain confiscations during the same time periods.
> 
> 'Similar policies also inflicted enormous suffering on the Soviet Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan, the Kuban region,Crimea, the lower Volga region, and other parts of the Soviet Union. As an emissary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Kaganovich traveled to Ukraine, the central regions of the USSR, the Northern Caucasus, and Siberia demanding the acceleration of collectivization and repressions against the Kulaks, who were generally blamed for the slow progress of collectivization.'
> Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Did I just prove you to be a moron, or what????
Click to expand...

_, let me verify for you that all of her books are scholarly and perfectly documented_.


And you are?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shall I wait for your response to the perfectly constructed and documented post #14....of shall I go on with a long and fulfilling life?
> 
> 
> 
> You fail due to not understanding the reasons for holding and folding, which FDR understood. He spent the mid and late 1930's motivating and funding small programs that allowed the MIC to develope new and modern aircraft and ships, including a new class of aircraft carrier. By 1940 the private industry was ready to begin producing the weapons that would win the coming war.
> Producing weapons that were already obsolete would have been very studpid.
Click to expand...




Liar.

Roosevelt was clueless about the impending conflict, and certainly about any matters dealing with either business, or anything military.


As I did with the leftwinger, watch me prove......prove with documentation....what I say.



FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.   See 
*"General of the Army: George C. Marshall, Soldier and Statesman,"*
By Ed Cray, p. 155

2. " In 1939, the US had the 21st largest army in the world, with only around 250,000 officers and men. This put US Army strength right behind Bulgaria." How did Roosevelt prepare for the inevitable entry into the war



Did I just rip one who is one a new one?


----------



## PoliticalChic

IcebergSlim said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jantje_Smit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?
> 
> 
> Could be this?
> "Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
> Coulter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You complain about lack of substance and then you quote Ann Coulter......
> 
> Too bad you conservative cultists don't do irony
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?
> 
> If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Queen Ann?
> Daughter of Federal employee.
> Product of Public High School and public State Law School?
Click to expand...




Please, document your expertise: which of Queen Ann's dozen scholarly best sellers have you read?


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> Did I just prove you to be a moron, or what????



No, you just proved that you can't answer the question

If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?


----------



## PoliticalChic

IcebergSlim said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> Were you and your kin homeschooled?
Click to expand...




Please don't hesitate to ask to compare your education with mine.

Hint...your alma mater, the Robert Fiance School of Cosmetology, is considered a joke at mine.


And...mine has the best fight song in the nation.


----------



## PoliticalChic

IcebergSlim said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jantje_Smit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> For context....which of Queen Ann's dozen best sellers have you read?
> 
> If none....the term 'irony' may creep back to bite you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a socialist I'm not in the habit of sponsoring book sales of right wing hatemongers. I believe I already told you that. But I've seen enough of her quotes to be familiar with her way of "reasoning".
> 
> Besides that, you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1. So....we have ascertained that you are expert at the government schooling technique of slandering those about whom you have no knowledge....if they don't toe the Liberals line.
> 
> a. As you have no knowledge of same, let me verify for you that all of her books are scholarly and perfectly documented.
> 
> 
> 2. "...you still haven't answered my question. If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?"
> Let me answer the question with a question:
> 
> Did the nascent United States carry on a genocide against it's citizens, as the Soviet Union did?
> 
> 
> September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933,*all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated*.
> Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained,*starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly*.
> NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.
> 
> 
> 'Lazar Kaganovich (together with Vyacheslav Molotov) participated with the All-Ukrainian Party Conference of 1930 and were given the task of implementation of the *collectivization policy that caused a catastrophic 1932–33 famine known as the Holodomor. *He also personally oversaw grain confiscations during the same time periods.
> 
> 'Similar policies also inflicted enormous suffering on the Soviet Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan, the Kuban region,Crimea, the lower Volga region, and other parts of the Soviet Union. As an emissary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Kaganovich traveled to Ukraine, the central regions of the USSR, the Northern Caucasus, and Siberia demanding the acceleration of collectivization and repressions against the Kulaks, who were generally blamed for the slow progress of collectivization.'
> Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Did I just prove you to be a moron, or what????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _, let me verify for you that all of her books are scholarly and perfectly documented_.
> 
> 
> And you are?
Click to expand...



Sure....simply compare my posts to yours.
That would be like comparing a bamboo hut to the Palace at Versailles.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I just prove you to be a moron, or what????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, you just proved that you can't answer the question
> 
> If it was evil of FDR to recognize the Sovjet Union, were the British also evil when they recognized the US?
Click to expand...



Don't you want to answer the pertinent query?

Did the nascent United States carry on a genocide against it's citizens, as the Soviet Union did?


September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933,*all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated*.
Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained,*starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly*.
NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.


'Lazar Kaganovich (together with Vyacheslav Molotov) participated with the All-Ukrainian Party Conference of 1930 and were given the task of implementation of the*collectivization policy that caused a catastrophic 1932–33 famine known as theHolodomor. *He also personally oversaw grain confiscations during the same time periods.

'Similar policies also inflicted enormous suffering on the Soviet Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan, the Kuban region,Crimea, the lower Volga region, and other parts of the Soviet Union. As an emissary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Kaganovich traveled to Ukraine, the central regions of the USSR, the NorthernCaucasus, and Siberia demanding the acceleration of collectivization and repressions against the Kulaks, who were generally blamed for the slow progress of collectivization.'
Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## MisterBeale

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
Click to expand...

Yeah, here's a picture for ya. . .


----------



## PoliticalChic

MisterBeale said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, here's a picture for ya. . .
Click to expand...



I wonder how many know that FDR actually wiretapped his wife Eleanor....

*See "FDR Goes to War: How Expanded Executive Power, Spiraling National Debt, and Restricted Civil Liberties..." by Folsom and Folsom.*


----------



## PoliticalChic

IcebergSlim said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> Were you and your kin homeschooled?
Click to expand...




Gee, slim.....as soon as I suggested comparing educations, you became awfully quiet....


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
Click to expand...




Do you really imagine that folks don't recognize what a liar you are?

Really?


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> Did the nascent United States carry on a genocide against it's citizens, as the Soviet Union did?



And I thought you were a history expert...


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did the nascent United States carry on a genocide against it's citizens, as the Soviet Union did?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I thought you were a history expert...
Click to expand...




Why would you conflate 'genocide' with pictures of American Indians?


And why are you still running away from the way I shredded your attempt to compare the young American nation with the blood-drenched Bolsheviks embraced by Roosevelt?


You're simply a fraud, aren't you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

The apologists, seeking a basis for the Roosevelt hagiography, cling by their fingernail to their fables, but ignore far more significant facts.

The Leftists were enamored with death and oppression.


5. *George Bernard Shaw met with Stalin,*as well. He returned, and wrote, “ We cannot afford to give ourselves moral airs when our most enterprising neighbors,*the Soviet Union, humanely and judiciously liquidates*a handful of exploiters and speculators to make the world safe for honest men.”

Now, lest one thinks this was said sarcastically, Lady Aster and others who were present, and took notes, from the meeting, wrote that*that was exactly and precisely what Stalin had said. He parroted the exact line that Stalin had given him!*
Kengor, Op.Cit.


a. When he returned from the Soviet Union,*Shaw backed up every lie that Walter Duranty reported. He testified that there was not, and never could be, a food shortage in the USSR.*
Paul Hollander, “Political Pilgrims,” p.11



Folks who knew the facts, yet ignored same included George Bernard Shaw......and Franklin Roosevelt.


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> Why would you conflate 'genocide' with pictures of American Indians?
> 
> 
> And why are you still running away from the way I shredded your attempt to compare the young American nation with the blood-drenched Bolsheviks embraced by Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> You're simply a fraud, aren't you.



Nah, the fraud would be you

Do you seriously not know what happened to the Indians? Or can't the word genocide be used in connection with your beloved, exceptional, capitalistic founding fathers? 

Doesn't Queen Anne have something to say about it?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you conflate 'genocide' with pictures of American Indians?
> 
> 
> And why are you still running away from the way I shredded your attempt to compare the young American nation with the blood-drenched Bolsheviks embraced by Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> You're simply a fraud, aren't you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, the fraud would be you
> 
> Do you seriously not know what happened to the Indians? Or can't the word genocide be used in connection with your beloved, exceptional, capitalistic founding fathers?
> 
> Doesn't Queen Anne have something to say about it?
Click to expand...



So THAT'S why you drop by! For an education!

The claim of 'genocide' is the Left's disreputable attempt to attack whites, and all Americans.

Take notes:

1. The decimation of Indian populations stemmed only rarely from massacres or military actions, but the majority of Indian deaths came *from infectious disease.*There is the Leftist/Liberal view that paints the settlers as barbaric, and the Indians as peaceful victims. 

*It is a myth that finds a home among America haters, who attempt to use slander of the settlers as a proxy for slandering today's Americans*


2.* Genocide* means deliberate and systematic. As described by the UN Convention, Article II, it involves “ a series of brutal acts committed with intent to destroy, …a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group as such.”

*No such thing happened.*


3.  Guenter Lewy (born 1923,Germany) is an author and historian, and a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts. In September 2004, Lewy published an essay entitled "_Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide?" in which he _says [Ward] Churchill's assertion that the U.S. Army intentionally spread smallpox among American Indians by distributing infected blankets in 1837 is false. Lewy calls Churchill's claim of 100,000 deaths from the incident "obviously absurd".



4. During the 4 centuries following European entry into North America, Indian population fell. By the beginning of the 20thCentury, officials found only 250,000 Indians in the territory of the US, as opposed to 2,476,000 identified as “American Indians or Alaska Natives” in the 2000 census.  Scholars estimate pre-Columbian North  American population range from 1.2 million (1928 tribe-by-tribe assessment)  up to 20 million by activists. 



*The only way one can claim the disease induced deaths of the natives was a "genocide" is by also attributing the deaths in Europe from the Black Plague as a genocide, as well.*

And....the "genocide" by American Indians in giving the world syphilis.

Go ahead.....the plague began in Egypt....so you'll have to claim it was an Arab genocide.


----------



## PoliticalChic

6. "Some historians consider [Walter] *Duranty's reports from Moscow* to be crucial in the decision taken by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to grant the Soviet Union diplomatic recognition in 1933.[36]Bolshevik Karl Radek said that was indeed the case.[4]

British journalist Malcolm Muggeridge (who went hopefully to live in the _New Civilization _in 1932, but soon became disillusioned) said of Duranty that he "always enjoyed his company; there was something vigorous, vivacious, preposterous, *about his unscrupulousness which made his persistent lying somehow absorbing."[37] Muggeridge characterised Duranty as "the greatest liar of any journalist I have met in 50 years of journalism."[38]Others have characterized Duranty as "the number oneUseful Idiotfor Lenin first, and later for Stalin."[39] *Denial of the Holodomor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

a. "Almost single-handedly did *Duranty aid and abet one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true.* He had swallowed the ends-justifies-the-means-argument hook, line and sinker. Duranty loved to repeat, when Stalin's atrocities were brought to light, "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs." Those "eggs" were the heads of men, women and children, and those "few" were merely tens of millions."  Stalin's apologist : Walter Duranty, the New York Times man in Moscow.


And this was the source of FDR's 'knowledge'???

Really???
This could apply equally to Duranty and Roosevelt: "...*aid and abet one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true."

*

After FDR was a quarter century as a professional politician???


The 'brilliant' Franklin Delano Roosevelt.....shouldn't he have known better?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you conflate 'genocide' with pictures of American Indians?
> 
> 
> And why are you still running away from the way I shredded your attempt to compare the young American nation with the blood-drenched Bolsheviks embraced by Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> You're simply a fraud, aren't you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, the fraud would be you
> 
> Do you seriously not know what happened to the Indians? Or can't the word genocide be used in connection with your beloved, exceptional, capitalistic founding fathers?
> 
> Doesn't Queen Anne have something to say about it?
Click to expand...




I love it when some dunce uses a 'funny' emoticon when they can't deny anything posted.
That would be you.


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> So THAT'S why you drop by! For an education!



Not really, I'm just here for fun

I love the way how you come up with excuses for the crimes of your beloved forefathers though, nobody wanted to kill Indians, they just happened to catch a disease.... and then the few that remained ended up in reservations... which kept getting smaller, especially if oil or gold was found......


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So THAT'S why you drop by! For an education!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really, I'm just here for fun
> 
> I love the way how you come up with excuses for the crimes of your beloved forefathers though, nobody wanted to kill Indians, they just happened to catch a disease.... and then the few that remained ended up in reservations... which kept getting smaller, especially if oil or gold was found......
Click to expand...




What???

You need more education?

Well.....OK...


Whatever the original number, historians agree that *infectious disease brought about 75-95% decline after European settlement began.*

Jared Mason Diamond is an American geographer,evolutionary biologist,physiologist,lecturer, and nonfiction author. Diamond works as a professor of geography and physiology at UCLA. He is best known for the Pulitzer Prize-winning book "_Guns, Germs, and Steel," _(1998), which also won the Phi Beta Kappa Award in Science, *in which he states “diseases introduced with Europeans spread from tribe to tribe far in advance of the Europeans themselves…[including] smallpox, measles, influenza, and typhus…”



You realize that you've moved from dunce all the way to liar.*
Both are sub-headings of 'reliable Democrat voter.'


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really imagine that folks don't recognize what a liar you are?
> 
> Really?
Click to expand...

 
Liar?

It does not appear that my pants are on fire


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really imagine that folks don't recognize what a liar you are?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liar?
> 
> It does not appear that my pants are on fire
Click to expand...




The query referred to your 'imagination.'

"Do you really imagine that folks don't recognize what a liar you are?"


If so....let me show you where you fit in:

Rachel Donezal...a white pretending to be black

Bruce Jenner .....a man pretending to be a woman

Barack Obama....an incompetent ideologue pretending to be an American President.


----------



## Jantje_Smit

PoliticalChic said:


> What???
> 
> You need more education?
> 
> Well.....OK...
> 
> 
> Whatever the original number, historians agree that *infectious disease brought about 75-95% decline after European settlement began.*
> 
> Jared Mason Diamond is an American geographer,evolutionary biologist,physiologist,lecturer, and nonfiction author. Diamond works as a professor of geography and physiology at UCLA. He is best known for the Pulitzer Prize-winning book "_Guns, Germs, and Steel," _(1998), which also won the Phi Beta Kappa Award in Science, *in which he states “diseases introduced with Europeans spread from tribe to tribe far in advance of the Europeans themselves…[including] smallpox, measles, influenza, and typhus…”
> 
> 
> 
> You realize that you've moved from dunce all the way to liar.*
> Both are sub-headings of 'reliable Democrat voter.'



Hmmm, you're almost there but your highlighting sucks

Should be like this

...Whatever the original number, historians agree that infectious disease brought about 75-95% decline* after European settlement began.*

And it should be

....diseases introduced *by* Europeans spread from tribe to tribe..

And it also seems you think biological warfare is a recent invention and that the Indians got infected by accident, very amusing.

Whatever makes you happy, just don't expect people with an actual education to swallow your nonsense


----------



## PoliticalChic

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What???
> 
> You need more education?
> 
> Well.....OK...
> 
> 
> Whatever the original number, historians agree that *infectious disease brought about 75-95% decline after European settlement began.*
> 
> Jared Mason Diamond is an American geographer,evolutionary biologist,physiologist,lecturer, and nonfiction author. Diamond works as a professor of geography and physiology at UCLA. He is best known for the Pulitzer Prize-winning book "_Guns, Germs, and Steel," _(1998), which also won the Phi Beta Kappa Award in Science, *in which he states “diseases introduced with Europeans spread from tribe to tribe far in advance of the Europeans themselves…[including] smallpox, measles, influenza, and typhus…”
> 
> 
> 
> You realize that you've moved from dunce all the way to liar.*
> Both are sub-headings of 'reliable Democrat voter.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, you're almost there but your highlighting sucks
> 
> Should be like this
> 
> ...Whatever the original number, historians agree that infectious disease brought about 75-95% decline* after European settlement began.*
> 
> And it should be
> 
> ....diseases introduced *by* Europeans spread from tribe to tribe..
> 
> And it also seems you think biological warfare is a recent invention and that the Indians got infected by accident, very amusing.
> 
> Whatever makes you happy, just don't expect people with an actual education to swallow your nonsense
Click to expand...



Biological warfare?

Where, you dunce?

Was this 'biological warfare'?

"The Black Death arrived in Europe by sea in October 1347 when 12 Genoese trading ships docked at the Sicilian port of Messina after a long journey through the Black Sea.... Over the next five years,*the mysterious Black Death would kill more than 20 million people in Europe*–almost one-third of the continent’s population."
Black Death - Facts Summary - HISTORY.com

It began in Egypt.


----------



## PoliticalChic

7. Well, a simpleton might say that *Roosevelt accepted the Soviet word *that the Bolsheviks would reform, change....

Roosevelt signed the recognition agreement: Maxim Litvinov "returned to the Soviet embassy.....all smiles....and said *'Well, it's all in the bag; we have it.'"*
On September 23, 1939, Dr. D. H. Dombrowsky testified before the Dies committee.
The Winona Republican-Herald from Winona Minnesota Page 12



a. "*The Russians laughed about their alleged promises*of future behavior. This is the conversation that Litvinov had with staff at his embassy after the 'agreement' was signed:
"Well, it's all in the bag. They wanted us to*recognize the debts*we owed them and I promised we were going to negotiate. But they did not know we were going to negotiate until doomsday. The next one was a corker; they wanted us to *promise freedom of religion in*the Soviet Union, and I promised that, too. I was very much prompted to offer that *I would personally collect all the Bibles *and ship them over."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.33.




*Did Roosevlet know he was the laughing stock, or was it simply more important to him to align with Joseph Stalin and Soviet Communism?*


"...*aid and abet one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true."
*


Which one?


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really imagine that folks don't recognize what a liar you are?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liar?
> 
> It does not appear that my pants are on fire
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The query referred to your 'imagination.'
> 
> "Do you really imagine that folks don't recognize what a liar you are?"
> 
> 
> If so....let me show you where you fit in:
> 
> Rachel Donezal...a white pretending to be black
> 
> Bruce Jenner .....a man pretending to be a woman
> 
> Barack Obama....an incompetent ideologue pretending to be an American President.
Click to expand...

 
Political Chic...a plagarist trying to pass herself off as an intellectual


----------



## Wyatt earp

rightwinger said:


> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down




WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.



Wow- a President recognizing a foreign country with a Communist government. Of course that makes him a communist.





Richard Nixon- ending 25 years of non-recognition of the People's Republic of China.


----------



## rightwinger

bear513 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
Click to expand...

 
The Red Army defeated Hitler and took half of Europe

FDR saved Western Europe


----------



## rightwinger

MisterBeale said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, here's a picture for ya. . .
Click to expand...

 
Which diplomats did Nancy Reagan meet with?


----------



## Syriusly

bear513 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
Click to expand...


Clearly you have never read a history book.

The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.

Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945? 

IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.

There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.


----------



## MisterBeale

rightwinger said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, here's a picture for ya. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which diplomats did Nancy Reagan meet with?
Click to expand...


----------



## whitehall

Support for FDR started to slip when he proposed the ironically named "judicial reform bill" of 1937 which was a thinly disguised plan to pack the Supreme Court with New Dealers. FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process. Black went on during the Truman administration to write the majority opinion that created the modern version of "separation of church and state" that had no basis in Constitutional law.There was so much wrong with the FDR administration that he would have gone down in history as the worst president if he wasn't impeached first unless he had total and unconditional support from the media.. Generally speaking the media writes the history books and "historians" in the media bent over backwards to preserve the FDR legacy. Every other president in history acknowledged a two term limit and gracefully bowed out but FDR ran for four. Democrats knew he would never live to complete his 4th term despite lying to the public and they selected a successor while the incumbent V.P. was on vacation.


----------



## rightwinger

whitehall said:


> Support for FDR started to slip when he proposed the ironically named "judicial reform bill" of 1937 which was a thinly disguised plan to pack the Supreme Court with New Dealers. FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process. Black went on during the Truman administration to write the majority opinion that created the modern version of "separation of church and state" that had no basis in Constitutional law.There was so much wrong with the FDR administration that he would have gone down in history as the worst president if he wasn't impeached first unless he had total and unconditional support from the media.. Generally speaking the media writes the history books and "historians" in the media bent over backwards to preserve the FDR legacy. Every other president in history acknowledged a two term limit and gracefully bowed out but FDR ran for four. Democrats knew he would never live to complete his 4th term despite lying to the public and they selected a successor while the incumbent V.P. was on vacation.


 
Yea...it really slipped

He only won two more elections after that


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
Click to expand...



"There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan blah blah blah...."
Surely you mean 'contrast,' don't you.

But there is.....

*Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
*
*
Oh....and btw.....Stalin and Hitler were allies until June 21, 1941, and Stalin taught both Hitler and Roosevelt about how to use concentration camps.

1. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...."
NYTimes,  November 27, 1925.


2. "Hitler often stated that he learned much from reading Marx, and *the whole of National Socialism is doctrinally based on Marxism." *
George Watson, Historian, Cambridge.
 "Socialists in Germany were national socialists, communists were international socialists." 
Vladimir Bukovsky.


3. When Hitler began his advances on other countries, Stalin refused to join the nations talking of stopping him. Stalin was, in fact, pleased that Hitler was destroying the old order throughout Europe. 

4. But Hitler didn't have the supplies nor resources he needed, so August 23, 1939, Soviet Russia' Foreign Minister Molotov signs the Nazi-Soviet Non-aggression Pact while German Foreign Minister Von Ribbentrop and Soviet leader Josef Stalin look on, while standing under a portrait of Lenin –materials to be provided in later economic agreements.

a. "1939- At the same time,* Stalin helps supply the German war effort,* providing the Nazi regime with oil, wood, copper, manganese ore, rubber, grain, and other resources under a trade agreement between the two nations. Stalin views the war against Germany as a conflict "between two groups of capitalist countries", saying there is "nothing wrong in their having a good fight and weakening each other." 
Georgy Zhukov hero file



5. September 1, 1939, Hitler attacked Poland....on September 17, Stalin attacks from the East. The Soviet radio transmitter in Minsk guided the Nazi bombers attacking Polish cities. Newsreel footage showed the Red Army in Nazi helmets, marching side by side with the SS. One photo shows the hammer and sickle along side the swastika.

a.  The Soviet press depicted the battle as a fight against Polish fascism, with the peace-loving Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union fighting aggressive Polish fascism.




Rumor has it that FDR used the Magic 8-Ball to decide which dictator he favored more.


----------



## PoliticalChic

whitehall said:


> Support for FDR started to slip when he proposed the ironically named "judicial reform bill" of 1937 which was a thinly disguised plan to pack the Supreme Court with New Dealers. FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process. Black went on during the Truman administration to write the majority opinion that created the modern version of "separation of church and state" that had no basis in Constitutional law.There was so much wrong with the FDR administration that he would have gone down in history as the worst president if he wasn't impeached first unless he had total and unconditional support from the media.. Generally speaking the media writes the history books and "historians" in the media bent over backwards to preserve the FDR legacy. Every other president in history acknowledged a two term limit and gracefully bowed out but FDR ran for four. Democrats knew he would never live to complete his 4th term despite lying to the public and they selected a successor while the incumbent V.P. was on vacation.





" FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process."

The Liberal demigod, Roosevelt, has a well documented history of antipathy to blacks, Jews and Asians.

More facts not taught in government school.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Support for FDR started to slip when he proposed the ironically named "judicial reform bill" of 1937 which was a thinly disguised plan to pack the Supreme Court with New Dealers. FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process. Black went on during the Truman administration to write the majority opinion that created the modern version of "separation of church and state" that had no basis in Constitutional law.There was so much wrong with the FDR administration that he would have gone down in history as the worst president if he wasn't impeached first unless he had total and unconditional support from the media.. Generally speaking the media writes the history books and "historians" in the media bent over backwards to preserve the FDR legacy. Every other president in history acknowledged a two term limit and gracefully bowed out but FDR ran for four. Democrats knew he would never live to complete his 4th term despite lying to the public and they selected a successor while the incumbent V.P. was on vacation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea...it really slipped
> 
> He only won two more elections after that
Click to expand...




"He only won two more elections after that"

*“No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”*
Attributed to H.L.Mencken

You, of course, are a case in point.


----------



## Moonglow

Business leaders wanted FDR to open relations with the USSR...The Koch family had first dibs...


----------



## Wyatt earp

Syriusly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
Click to expand...


Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....

They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.


----------



## Moonglow

PoliticalChic said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Support for FDR started to slip when he proposed the ironically named "judicial reform bill" of 1937 which was a thinly disguised plan to pack the Supreme Court with New Dealers. FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process. Black went on during the Truman administration to write the majority opinion that created the modern version of "separation of church and state" that had no basis in Constitutional law.There was so much wrong with the FDR administration that he would have gone down in history as the worst president if he wasn't impeached first unless he had total and unconditional support from the media.. Generally speaking the media writes the history books and "historians" in the media bent over backwards to preserve the FDR legacy. Every other president in history acknowledged a two term limit and gracefully bowed out but FDR ran for four. Democrats knew he would never live to complete his 4th term despite lying to the public and they selected a successor while the incumbent V.P. was on vacation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " FDR cleverly appointed a former KKK member to the supreme court and Justice Black paid him back with the majority opinion that "justified" incarcerating American citizens without due process."
> 
> The Liberal demigod, Roosevelt, has a well documented history of antipathy to blacks, Jews and Asians.
> 
> More facts not taught in government school.
Click to expand...

How is the KKK organization communistic in nature?


----------



## Wyatt earp

rightwinger said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Red Army defeated Hitler and took half of Europe
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
Click to expand...


Bullshit


----------



## jillian

PoliticalChic said:


> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.



regan and Atwater gave the wacky radical right its seat at the table.

i'll take Roosevelt.

thanks. 

but that whole homeschooling thing must confuse you,


----------



## PoliticalChic

Moonglow said:


> Business leaders wanted FDR to open relations with the USSR...The Koch family had first dibs...





Shouldn't you stick to topics you know something about....such as favorite Star War film, and most of the letters in the alphabets?


FDR hated business leaders, yet you write "Business leaders wanted FDR to open relations with the USSR."

Gads, what a fool.

*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."
*"New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton Folsom*


Certainly FDR would have jumped to whatever 'business leaders' told him to.
You dope.


----------



## rightwinger

bear513 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
Click to expand...

 
How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?

The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan blah blah blah...."
> Surely you mean 'contrast,' don't you.
> 
> But there is.....
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*.
Click to expand...


Franklin Roosevelt saved the farmers of America, while the GOP was letting them go out of business. 
Franklin Roosevelt did not accept 'communism'- any more than Nixon 'accepted communism.
FDR worked with Communists while defeating Germany and Japan- two countries which were actually at war with the United States- Reagan never defeated any country. 
FDR led the country from 24.75 unemployment in 1933 to 9.66 in 1941- a drop of 16%- Reagan led the country from 10.8 to 5.3% unemployment- a drop of 5.5%.

But I do understand why you hate FDR so much

He brought Social Security to Americans.
And Unemployment Insurance
And bank stability

No wonder you hate FDR.

He was pro-American.


----------



## PoliticalChic

jillian said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regan and Atwater gave the wacky radical right its seat at the table.
> 
> i'll take Roosevelt.
> 
> thanks.
> 
> but that whole homeschooling thing must confuse you,
Click to expand...




Oh, my.....another 'I hate you' post from a Liberal.

You had nothing to say about any of the facts I've posted.

That's because you know nothing....but you remain a reliable Democrat voter.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Business leaders wanted FDR to open relations with the USSR...The Koch family had first dibs...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shouldn't you stick to topics you know something about..
Click to expand...


Oh Chic- if we insisted you stick to topic you know something about- you would never be able to post on USMB.

But good job of posting GOP talking points.


----------



## rightwinger

bear513 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Red Army defeated Hitler and took half of Europe
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bullshit
Click to expand...

 
Failed history didn't you? The Red Army killed 20 times the number of Nazis that we did


----------



## Syriusly

bear513 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
Click to expand...


Fuck you and your ilk that are upset that millions  of American GI's didn't die because of your anti-Communist zeal.


----------



## Moonglow

President Roosevelt took office in 1933 and sought to establish relations with the Soviets, in part because the United States was the only major power yet to recognize the Soviet Union.

The main issues surrounding the establishment of relations included the settling of Soviet debts, Soviet involvement in American domestic affairs (like supporting the American Communist Party), and the legal status of Americans living in the Soviet Union.
The hopes for friendly relations quickly broke down, however. The two sides could not reach an agreement on the debts and the United States felt that the Soviets continued to interfere in United States relations. Not until the outbreak of World War II did the United States and Soviet Union begin to cooperate, with the Americans providing arms and material to the Soviets for their fight against Nazi Germany.
http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2...lomatic-relations-with-the-soviet-union/?_r=0


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
Click to expand...



Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.


Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
Click to expand...


I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?

Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?

Tell us your alternative?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan blah blah blah...."
> Surely you mean 'contrast,' don't you.
> 
> But there is.....
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Franklin Roosevelt saved the farmers of America, while the GOP was letting them go out of business.
> Franklin Roosevelt did not accept 'communism'- any more than Nixon 'accepted communism.
> FDR worked with Communists while defeating Germany and Japan- two countries which were actually at war with the United States- Reagan never defeated any country.
> FDR led the country from 24.75 unemployment in 1933 to 9.66 in 1941- a drop of 16%- Reagan led the country from 10.8 to 5.3% unemployment- a drop of 5.5%.
> 
> But I do understand why you hate FDR so much
> 
> He brought Social Security to Americans.
> And Unemployment Insurance
> And bank stability
> 
> No wonder you hate FDR.
> 
> He was pro-American.
Click to expand...



You appear to be quite the fool.
Bet I know who you voted for in the last election.

1.  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 andUnemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

2.   In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”  
http://www.aei.org/article/26390

a. "_ “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


3. "Reagan never defeated any country."
He defeated the Evil Empire without firing a shot.

"Reagan was made from far sterner stuff than was his Soviet counterpart. His genial grin and wise-cracking demeanor concealed a spine of steel when push came to shove. Yet at their next meeting in Reykjavik in 1986, where Gorbachev would not budge on the "Star Wars" question, Reagan was decisive and unforgiving. He recalls in An American Life how he stood up from the table to proclaim that the meeting was over. Then he turned to his Secretary of State: "Let's go, George. We're leaving." Like any good diplomat, Shultz was crushed by so much roughness, but Reagan was completely unfazed. Later on, he explained: "I went to Reykjavik determined that everything was negotiable except two things, our freedom and our future."  
The 'Amazing and Mysterious Life' of Ronald Reagan

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_77/ai_n6353166/pg_3/?tag=content;col1



BTW....you could have done a much better job defending Roosevelt if you had a real education....
Like this:
Consider the following pluses for FDR( from “The Hundred Days of FDR”, by Schlesinger)

  "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?"


And all we had to give up for these material benefits was the America of our Founders.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
Click to expand...



"I am looking for your alternative PC..."
No prob!

1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*

"Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.


2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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


3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"


----------



## Moonglow

Still pushing that false Reagan myth about defeating the USSR single handedly...The official date of the fall of the USSR is 1991, long after Dutch was in office...


----------



## Moonglow

Surely then Churchill was a commie pinko fag since he was giving the USSR aid earlier then the US did..


----------



## Wyatt earp

Syriusly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk that are upset that millions  of American GI's didn't die because of your anti-Communist zeal.
Click to expand...



My ass you pinko commie that millions would have died, we could have been in Moscow under a month.

The prick gave away half of fucking Europe for over 40 years.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan blah blah blah...."
> Surely you mean 'contrast,' don't you.
> 
> But there is.....
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Franklin Roosevelt saved the farmers of America, while the GOP was letting them go out of business.
> Franklin Roosevelt did not accept 'communism'- any more than Nixon 'accepted communism.
> FDR worked with Communists while defeating Germany and Japan- two countries which were actually at war with the United States- Reagan never defeated any country.
> FDR led the country from 24.75 unemployment in 1933 to 9.66 in 1941- a drop of 16%- Reagan led the country from 10.8 to 5.3% unemployment- a drop of 5.5%.
> 
> But I do understand why you hate FDR so much
> 
> He brought Social Security to Americans.
> And Unemployment Insurance
> And bank stability
> 
> No wonder you hate FDR.
> 
> He was pro-American.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You appear to be quite the fool.
> .
Click to expand...


Coming from a fool- that is faint praise.

Nice cut and paste by the way.

LIke I said- no wonder you hate FDR- he was pro-American.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
Click to expand...




"....Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union-..."

I look for educated people on the other side, and fools like you are what I find.

Hitler defeat Stalin???

What sort of fool are you???? Stalin gave Hitler the resources for his Wehrmacht.

1. "Between June 22, 1941, and January 31, 1942, the Germans had lost 6,000 airplanes and more than 3,200 tanks and similar vehicles; and no less than 918,000 men had been killed, wounded, or gone missing in action, amounting to 28.7 percent of the average strength of the army, namely, 3,2 million men.[33]

(In the Soviet Union, Germany would lose no less than 10 million of its total 13.5 million men killed, wounded, or taken prisoner during the entire war; and*the Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killed*in the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”



2. And this, the only logical conclusion:

"....realistically middle sized *Germany could not defeat the much larger USSR *in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence(comment)


Clearly, any explanation of Roosevelt's pro-Soviet policy cannot rely on the fear of Stalin quitting the war.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan blah blah blah...."
> Surely you mean 'contrast,' don't you.
> 
> But there is.....
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Franklin Roosevelt saved the farmers of America, while the GOP was letting them go out of business.
> Franklin Roosevelt did not accept 'communism'- any more than Nixon 'accepted communism.
> FDR worked with Communists while defeating Germany and Japan- two countries which were actually at war with the United States- Reagan never defeated any country.
> FDR led the country from 24.75 unemployment in 1933 to 9.66 in 1941- a drop of 16%- Reagan led the country from 10.8 to 5.3% unemployment- a drop of 5.5%.
> 
> But I do understand why you hate FDR so much
> 
> He brought Social Security to Americans.
> And Unemployment Insurance
> And bank stability
> 
> No wonder you hate FDR.
> 
> He was pro-American.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You appear to be quite the fool.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Coming from a fool- that is faint praise.
> 
> Nice cut and paste by the way.
> 
> LIke I said- no wonder you hate FDR- he was pro-American.
Click to expand...




Anytime one of your refers to 'cut and paste' it means you can't contest what I have posted.
It is a dodge used by Liberal dunces.


Clearly, FDR was pro-Stalin, not pro-America.

1. The result of FDR's efforts include a disaster for America. 
On April 5, 1951, Judge Irving R. Kaufman sentenced the Rosenbergs to death for theft of atomic secrets, and, resulted in *"the communist aggression in Korea, with the resultant casualties exceeding 50,000* and who knows but that millions more of innocent people may pay the price of your treason." Judge Kaufman's Sentencing Statement in the Rosenberg Case

*a. *It is clear today, based on archival evidence, unearthed by researchers in Russia and released in the United States, that Kaufman was correct.* "Absent an atomic bomb, Stalin would not have released Pyongyang's army to conquer the entire Korean peninsula.* Confident that his possession of atomic weapons neutralized America's strategic advantage, Stalin was emboldened to unleash war in Korea in 1950." 
Haynes, Klehr, and Vassiliev, "Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America," p.  143, 545. And Romerstein and Breindel,"The Venona Secrets," p. xv, 253.

b. It is important to connect the treachery with the impact of that treachery: the theft of the nuclear technology with 36,940 Americans killed, 91,134 wounded, and 8,176 still missing, and this does not include at least two million civilian lives claimed on both sides. 
Bruce Cumings, "The Korean War: A History.' 

Included were 1.3 million South Korean casualties, including 400,000 dead. North Korea, 2 million casualties, and 900,000 Chinese soldiers killed.


And....the fact that there ever was a Communist China....a direct result of Stalin's spies in Roosevelt's administration.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
Click to expand...

  I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread

The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that

You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
Click to expand...




I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?

You ain't seen nuthin' yet.


----------



## Syriusly

bear513 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk that are upset that millions  of American GI's didn't die because of your anti-Communist zeal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My ass you pinko commie that millions would have died, we could have been in Moscow under a month.
> 
> The prick gave away half of fucking Europe for over 40 years.
Click to expand...


Are you really this absolutely fucking ignorant? 

I have tremendous respect for the American military of WW2-  FDR had built up our military from being smaller than Portugal's in 1938 to the most powerful navy and air force in the world in 1945.

In 1945- we were in the middle of a 2 front war- the Soviet Union was our erstwhile ally- driving the majority of the German military back all the way to Berlin- while we fought our way(with our British/Canadian/Australian/French allies) from Normandy to the Rhine- against I believe about 1/3 of the German military. 

At the same time- we were busy fighting Imperial Japan.

The Soviet Army coming at the Germans at the time were the most powerful Army in the world- sorry if you don't like that- but it was. The Soviet's had more- and better tanks than the Americans. The main American tank- the Sherman- was not even a match for the Soviet T-34/85, let alone the JS-1 and JS-2 or the Soviet SU-122 and SU-152. The Soviets had masses of artillery- masses. And their army was a veteran force that had just fought its way from Moscow to Berlin- they knew the terrain- and the weather. 

America had a superior air force- but the Soviets still had a very capable air force- so there would not have been a cake walk- and without American air support- our ground forces would have been wiped out. 

So exactly why would you have wanted millions of American troops to die- to beat the Soviets at a time we were still trying to defeat Imperial Japan?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk that are upset that millions  of American GI's didn't die because of your anti-Communist zeal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My ass you pinko commie that millions would have died, we could have been in Moscow under a month.
> 
> The prick gave away half of fucking Europe for over 40 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you really this absolutely fucking ignorant?
> 
> I have tremendous respect for the American military of WW2-  FDR had built up our military from being smaller than Portugal's in 1938 to the most powerful navy and air force in the world in 1945.
> 
> In 1945- we were in the middle of a 2 front war- the Soviet Union was our erstwhile ally- driving the majority of the German military back all the way to Berlin- while we fought our way(with our British/Canadian/Australian/French allies) from Normandy to the Rhine- against I believe about 1/3 of the German military.
> 
> At the same time- we were busy fighting Imperial Japan.
> 
> The Soviet Army coming at the Germans at the time were the most powerful Army in the world- sorry if you don't like that- but it was. The Soviet's had more- and better tanks than the Americans. The main American tank- the Sherman- was not even a match for the Soviet T-34/85, let alone the JS-1 and JS-2 or the Soviet SU-122 and SU-152. The Soviets had masses of artillery- masses. And their army was a veteran force that had just fought its way from Moscow to Berlin- they knew the terrain- and the weather.
> 
> America had a superior air force- but the Soviets still had a very capable air force- so there would not have been a cake walk- and without American air support- our ground forces would have been wiped out.
> 
> So exactly why would you have wanted millions of American troops to die- to beat the Soviets at a time we were still trying to defeat Imperial Japan?
Click to expand...




Vulgarity is the Liberal white flag.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
Click to expand...


Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig. 

But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.


----------



## rightwinger

bear513 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF???? FDR gave Stalin almost half of Europe, read a history book will ya...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk that are upset that millions  of American GI's didn't die because of your anti-Communist zeal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My ass you pinko commie that millions would have died, we could have been in Moscow under a month.
> 
> The prick gave away half of fucking Europe for over 40 years.
Click to expand...

 
The Soviets had better tanks than we did and were more experienced, They also showed a willingness to fight to the death which Americans never would have tolerated

Your way would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of additional deaths. FDRs way resulted in the USSR folding without us firing a shot


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
Click to expand...

 
Self declared victories are so shallow...wouldn't you agree?

You still can't stay on topic in your own thread


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have never read a history book.
> 
> The Soviet Union defeated the entire eastern half of German controlled Europe- controlled Poland, and all of what became the Eastern block countries- and was still considered at that time our ally- AND we wanted the USSR to go to war against Japan.
> 
> Do you think that the United States should have gone to war with the USSR to free Poland in 1945?
> 
> IF you look at history- by containing the Soviets where they were- the Soviet empire eventually collapsed under its own weight.
> 
> There really is no comparison between Roosevelt and Reagan- except for one thing- both were extremely charismatic- and both were extremely popular with American voters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
Click to expand...


So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.

Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
Click to expand...




Your attempt to save face?

You can't save what you never had.

I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct. 
And it wasn't me revealing those facts.....it was those dozens of direct quotes that you couldn't contend with or dispute.

You have yet to find a single thing I've posted that wasn't true,accurate and correct..
And you never will.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Self declared victories are so shallow...wouldn't you agree?
> 
> You still can't stay on topic in your own thread
Click to expand...



Ripped you and your god to shreds, Leftwinger.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.
> 
> Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......
Click to expand...




"So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia."

Either find a quote where I said that or admit that you're a lying sack of sewage.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct.
> .
Click to expand...


You provide some meager amusement with your pro-Nazi rants.


----------



## rightwinger

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you and your ilk for the mayhem you let FDR get away with....
> 
> They should have never stopped at Berlin and drove right into Moscow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.
> 
> Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......
Click to expand...

 
She has already posted several threads where she supported allowing the Nazis to win


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.
> 
> Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia."
> 
> Either find a quote where I said that or admit that you're a lying sack of sewage.
Click to expand...


Here you go- what you suggested

. *When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing..*

"Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You provide some meager amusement with your pro-Nazi rants.
Click to expand...




"....your pro-Nazi rants."

So stipulated that you're a lying sack of sewage.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many millions of deaths would you have tolerated?
> 
> The Nazis lost around 8 million trying to do the same thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.
> 
> Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She has already posted several threads where she supported allowing the Nazis to win
Click to expand...




"She has already posted several threads where she supported allowing the Nazis to win."

That has never happened.

It is what one expects starting from the lie in your avi.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You provide some meager amusement with your pro-Nazi rants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....your pro-Nazi rants."
> 
> So stipulated that you're a lying sack of sewage.
Click to expand...


So says the idiot who would prefer the Nazi's defeat the USSR just so you can be 'anti-communist'


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.
> 
> Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia."
> 
> Either find a quote where I said that or admit that you're a lying sack of sewage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here you go- what you suggested
> 
> . *When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing..*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *
Click to expand...



Are you staking your veracity on the claim that that says I wanted the Nazis to win?

Speak up.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You provide some meager amusement with your pro-Nazi rants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....your pro-Nazi rants."
> 
> So stipulated that you're a lying sack of sewage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So says the idiot who would prefer the Nazi's defeat the USSR just so you can be 'anti-communist'
Click to expand...




I love it. An admission that I've destroyed you and your god Roosevelt...and you have nothing left but lies.


----------



## Syriusly

Well PC has said he/she opposed the United States providing support to the USSR while the USSR and the NAZI's fought.

Stalin has said that without American lend-lease support the USSR would likely have been defeated by the Nazi's.

Why would PC be in favor of the Nazi's defeating the USSR and being able to face U.S. troops on a single front- other than because he/she is anti-American?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You provide some meager amusement with your pro-Nazi rants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "....your pro-Nazi rants."
> 
> So stipulated that you're a lying sack of sewage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So says the idiot who would prefer the Nazi's defeat the USSR just so you can be 'anti-communist'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it. An admission that I've destroyed you and your god Roosevelt...and you have nothing left but lies.
Click to expand...


The voices in your head are not admissions.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am looking for your alternative PC- do you think FDR should have declared war against the USSR while we were at war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan?
> 
> Or perhaps just not assist the USSR, so that Nazi Germany could kill millions more Soviet citizens- and perhaps defeat the Soviet Union- so Hitler could link up with Imperial Japan in the east?
> 
> Tell us your alternative?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "I am looking for your alternative PC..."
> No prob!
> 
> 1. When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time* securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you would have preferred that the Nazi's defeat the USSR- so that the Nazi's could establish a non-Communist Nazi government in Russia.
> 
> Well that would have help the United States- and Americans so very much......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She has already posted several threads where she supported allowing the Nazis to win
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "She has already posted several threads where she supported allowing the Nazis to win."
> 
> That has never happened.
> 
> It is what one expects starting from the lie in your avi.
Click to expand...

 
We have been through your rants about FDR should not have helped defeat the Nazis Frau Braun

Have you changed your mind?


----------



## LA RAM FAN

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stuck your foot in your mouth again:
> Stalin killed 60 million of his own citizens, yet Roosevelt made him is BFF.
> 
> 
> Killing and putting one's own citizens in concentration camps appears to be the hallmark of totalitarians such as Stalin, Hitler, and Roosevelt.
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is difficult for you, but please try to keep up with your own thread
> 
> The question was whether the US should have invaded the USSR after Berlin...your response has NOTHING to do with that
> 
> You really did get through college by cut and paste didn't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've ripped you and your god to shreds,huh?
> 
> You ain't seen nuthin' yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I know that 'arguing' with you is as fruitless as arguing with a pig.
> 
> But showing what an idiot you are does provide some amusement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't argue....I teach. I document why I'm correct.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You provide some meager amusement with your pro-Nazi rants.
Click to expand...


its really amusing how she claims you are the idiot when she runs off with her tail between her legs anytime the corruption of Reagan and the republicans are exposed.

she has such an obsession with FDR and a blind love for bastard Reagan,she wont document that Reagan  tripled the debt of all american presidents COMBINED before him.

she'll make a thread talking about how the democrats never met a communist they did not like showing a pic of FDR sitting next to Stalin but each time I post the pic of Eisenhower standing next to Stalin watching him murder women,she ignores and it and acts like i did not post the pic.

thats the education for our resident troll of USMB that the government skipped.Here is also some home schooling for our resident troll on mass murderer Reagan the government skipped as well.

Ronald Reagan: Guilty of Treason & War Crimes

funny how she lives in her fairy tale and claiming arguing with you is fruitless when SHE is the one that runs off with her tail between her legs when confronted with pesky facts she cant refute  on the corruption of reagan exposed.


----------



## Sallow

Reagan's legacy.
Unions Busted.
Stagnant Wages.
Several Financial Cataclysms.
Thousands dead in Central America.
Thousands dead in the Middle East.

And of course:


----------



## Sallow




----------



## LA RAM FAN

Sallow said:


>



weird that USMB's resident troll rightwinger has changed his tune on Reagan.He has always tooted the horn of the governments as well as PC that Reagan was a great president as well,whats up with HIM liking your posts?


----------



## PoliticalChic

*And one more impairment that Franklin Roosevelt saddled America with....*

... our lack of understanding about the sinister nature of the Soviet Union, genocide, oppression, slaughter....when it come to Soviet crime' is the lies that Franklin Roosevelt told the public in support of Stalin.


*FDR told the public that the Soviets were just like us..*.in fact, during the war, he swore to it.

Roosevelt swore to the American public that Stalin fought for the same ideals! FDR was lying! 

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was freedom of religion in the USSR. "The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."                                                                                                                    "Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to
Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137




8. The US Constitution forbids 'ex post facto' laws....and Roosevelt told the American public that Russia fought for the same things as America.....


"The actual insurrection--the Bolshevik Revolution--began on the morning of November 6 (October 24) 1917, when Kerensky ordered the Bolshevik press closed." The Russian Revolution and the Soviet Union Union

In November/December, the penal system was re-written to include "enemy of the people."

...and, ex-post facto, the Bolsheviks arrested and exterminated all those 'enemies of the people.'




"The Soviet Union made extensive use of the term *[the enemy of the people*]  (Russian language:враг народа,_"vrag naroda"_), as it fitted well with the idea that the people were in control. The term was used by Vladimir Lenin after coming to power, as early as in the decree of 28 November 1917:
Nicolas Werth, Karel Bartošek, Jean-Louis Panné, Jean-Louis Margolin, Andrzej Paczkowski,Stéphane Courtois, "_The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression_"



No freedom of the press, ex-post facto laws, extermination of political enemies.....

*Just like America????

Or....the America that Franklin Roosevelt was planning for.*


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> *And one more impairment that Franklin Roosevelt saddled America with.....*



More of your 'I hate the American who led the United States to defeating the Nazi's and Imperial Japan" rant.

So many things you hate about FDR

Leading the defeat of Japan
Leading the defeat of Nazi Germany
Social Security for Americans
Preventing a bank collapse with Federal depositers insurance
Unemployment insurance
Preventing the collapse of the American farms

And being possibly the most popular President the United States has ever had.

All of the things PC hates.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sallow said:


> Reagan's legacy.
> Unions Busted.
> Stagnant Wages.
> Several Financial Cataclysms.
> Thousands dead in Central America.
> Thousands dead in the Middle East.
> 
> And of course:




Interesting that you post that image of 9/11...
It was due to the direct actions of the Democrats/Liberals.

Watch:
1. *"The damage done to the CIA by this congressional oversight regime (Democrat-controlled Pike and Church Committees)* is quite extensive. The committees increased the number of CIA officials subject to Senate confirmation, *condemned the agency for its contacts with unscrupulous characters,* *prohibited any further contact with these bad characters,* insisted that the United States not engage or assist in any coup which may harm a foreign leader, and overwhelmed the agency with interminable requests for briefings (some 600 alone in 1996).

2. [C]hairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, *Joseph Biden,…[t]he Delaware Democrat was one of seventeen Senators who voted in 1974 to ban all covert operations, *and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations." 
Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA


3. This is not the first time *Democrats have tried to aid our enemies *by destroying intelligence apparatus.....and have a responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan's legacy.
> Unions Busted.
> Stagnant Wages.
> Several Financial Cataclysms.
> Thousands dead in Central America.
> Thousands dead in the Middle East.
> 
> And of course:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that you post that image of 9/11...
> It was due to the direct actions of the Democrats/Liberals.
> 
> Watch:
> 1. *"The damage done to the CIA by this congressional oversight regime (Democrat-controlled Pike and Church Committees)* is quite extensive. The committees increased the number of CIA officials subject to Senate confirmation, *condemned the agency for its contacts with unscrupulous characters,* *prohibited any further contact with these bad characters,* insisted that the United States not engage or assist in any coup which may harm a foreign leader, and overwhelmed the agency with interminable requests for briefings (some 600 alone in 1996).
> 
> 2. [C]hairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, *Joseph Biden,…[t]he Delaware Democrat was one of seventeen Senators who voted in 1974 to ban all covert operations, *and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA
> 
> 
> 3. This is not the first time *Democrats have tried to aid our enemies *by destroying intelligence apparatus.....and have a responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.
Click to expand...


Reagan funneled aid directly to the Muj and Osama Bin Laden.

That's in addition to funding the Contras, who in addition to making people in Central America "disappear", raped, tortured and murdered 3 American Nuns.

The Reagan Legacy


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan's legacy.
> Unions Busted.
> Stagnant Wages.
> Several Financial Cataclysms.
> Thousands dead in Central America.
> Thousands dead in the Middle East.
> 
> And of course:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that you post that image of 9/11...
> It was due to the direct actions of the Democrats/Liberals.
> .
Click to expand...


Actually it was due to the actions of Saudi Arabian terrorists.

Shame you are so anti-American that you believe that American liberals were flying those airplanes- but considering your bizarre interpretation of history it is no surprise that you blame liberals- rather than our enemy.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.



What?

A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?


----------



## Sallow

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan's legacy.
> Unions Busted.
> Stagnant Wages.
> Several Financial Cataclysms.
> Thousands dead in Central America.
> Thousands dead in the Middle East.
> 
> And of course:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that you post that image of 9/11...
> It was due to the direct actions of the Democrats/Liberals.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually it was due to the actions of Saudi Arabian terrorists.
> 
> Shame you are so anti-American that you believe that American liberals were flying those airplanes- but considering your bizarre interpretation of history it is no surprise that you blame liberals- rather than our enemy.
Click to expand...

Liberals make war on foreign enemies.
Conservatives make war on Americans.

Whiskey Rebellion, Mountain Meadow Massacre, Civil War - All Conservative insurrections.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And one more impairment that Franklin Roosevelt saddled America with.....*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More of your 'I hate the American who led the United States to defeating the Nazi's and Imperial Japan" rant.
> 
> So many things you hate about FDR
> 
> Leading the defeat of Japan
> Leading the defeat of Nazi Germany
> Social Security for Americans
> Preventing a bank collapse with Federal depositers insurance
> Unemployment insurance
> Preventing the collapse of the American farms
> 
> And being possibly the most popular President the United States has ever had.
> 
> All of the things PC hates.
Click to expand...



While I must admit that proving you to be stupid is akin to 'gilding the lily,'
it is fun.

So here is a challenge you'll run from as fast as you can:

Roosevelt embraces the homicidal maniac Joseph Stalin, made certain that Soviet Communism would survive, and made a cozy home for Stalin's spies, right up to allowing one to  live in the White House.

You pretend to see Adolph Hitler as the worst sort of evil....and try to tie me to him! 

Challenge:

*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than Roosevelt's best friend forever, Joseph Stalin?*

That's called 'critical thinking'...something eschewed in government schooling.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
Click to expand...



Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.

1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information

2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum

3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "

BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER



4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10


----------



## TNHarley

What was communist about FDR?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .



Oh that is really easy.

Hitler declared war on the United States.
Joseph Stalin did not. 
Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that. 

However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.

Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.


----------



## Syriusly

TNHarley said:


> What was communist about FDR?



PC doesn't like him. 

Thats all it takes.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.0
Click to expand...


Hmmm compared to a RWNJ like you? 

You advocate we should have let Nazi Germany conquer the Soviet Union, linking Germany to Japan......

Now that is a really traitorous suggestion.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
Click to expand...




Of course he did.
He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.


Some fools don't recognize the consubstatial basis of the two.
Raise your paw.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
Click to expand...


Hitler declared war on the United States.
Joseph Stalin did not.
Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.

However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.

Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
Click to expand...




9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today. The are the winners. The Republican mascot shouldn't be an elephant...it should be a capon.

 Hence, the prevalence of *the lies of the Roosevelt apologists.*


" Among these monstrous crimes, Ukraine stands out as the worst in terms of numbers. *Stalin declared war on his own people* in 1932, sending Commissars V. Molotov and Lazar Kaganovitch and NKVD secret police chief Genrikh Yagoda to crush the resistance of Ukrainian farmers to *forced collectivization*.

Ukraine was sealed off. All food supplies and livestock were confiscated. NKVD death squads executed "anti-party elements." Furious that insufficient Ukrainians were being shot, Kaganovitch - virtually the Soviet Union's Adolf Eichmann - set a quota of 10,000 executions a week. Eighty percent of Ukrainian intellectuals were shot.



During the bitter winter of 1932-33, *25,000 Ukrainians per day were being shot or died of starvation and cold.* Cannibalism became common. Ukraine, writes historian Robert Conquest, looked like a giant version of the future Bergen-Belsen death camp.

The mass murder of seven million Ukrainians*, three million of them children*, and deportation to the gulag of two million more (where most died) was hidden by Soviet propaganda. Pro-communist westerners, like The New York Times' Walter Duranty, British writers Sidney and Beatrice Webb and French Prime Minister Edouard Herriot, toured Ukraine, denied reports of genocide, and applauded what they called Soviet "agrarian reform." Those who spoke out against the genocide were branded "fascist agents."  Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust - Eric Margolis




"...hidden by *Soviet propaganda."  Much of which came from the Roosevelt White House.*


It doesn't say "no one knew the truth," does it. It says " Those who spoke out against the genocide were branded "fascist agents."  

*And the very same pattern can be found in this thread.  *


----------



## Unkotare

rightwinger said:


> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down






You could not be more wrong.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
Click to expand...


Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-

Hitler declared war on the United States.
Joseph Stalin did not.
Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.

However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.

Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
Click to expand...




Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
"*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"

....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.


In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
....Stalin, by every measure was the worse.
He killed more innocents, he manipulated more events, he placed his imprimatur on more of the future than Hitler.


And, as proven by how he wrapped Roosevelt around his finger, the far, far more dangerous.
Stalin, far smarter than either Hitler or Roosevelt, was the winner of WWII.*

*

And you gave up any elementary intellect that you might have been born with when you relinquished your right to make judgments about the world and the evil folks in it.

Plus the fact that you never had any character, as seen in how frequently you lie.*


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
Click to expand...


Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.

Hitler declared war on the United States.

Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.

Stalin did not declare war on the United States

120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.

I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.

Any real American.....


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> *Stalin, far smarter than either Hitler or Roosevelt, was the winner of WWII.
> .*



Fast forward from 1945 to 2015
FDR's United States is the most powerful country in the world.
Stalin's USSR no longer exists- and its successor is a sad shadow of the USSR's might. 

But of course you prefer Hitler to FDR.


----------



## Wyatt earp

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
Click to expand...



Stalin didn't?????????


The Forsaken: Americans in Stalin's gulags


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
Click to expand...



Amazing how dumb you are, isn't it.
*At Stalin's behest Roosevelt allowed the deaths of over 100,000 soldiers who didn't have to die.*


1. By following Stalin's orders.....that's correct, Stalin ordered Roosevelt....not to accept Germany's surrender, FDR extended WWII as he had extended the Depression....by several years.


a. "*Archival evidence indicates that the Soviet’s wanted the war to continue *long enough for them to conquer Eastern Europe and in order for Germany to be utterly destroyed or “pastoralized” which was called for in t*he Morgenthau Plan which was actually written by Soviet spy Harry Dexter White*. The Soviets were also clamoring for a “second front” in France in order to deflect the allies out of Italy and the Balkans which was too close to Russia."
Chuck Morse Speaks: The Canaris Cover-up

For whatever reason, Franklin *Roosevelt was obsequious, even servile, to Stalin's*every wish. Again....to Stalin's plan...not to American casualties.
Not to Churchill.....only to Stalin.

b. "More than 200,000 American fighting men were killed in World War II, together with 375,000 British and millions of other nationalities.*Most of these deaths occurred after mid-1943, when it was clear to all concerned that the Axis and Japan had lost.*Why did the fighting continue for two years after the issue had been decided?"
John Dombrowski


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
Click to expand...




".... but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't-..."

Gads, you're dumb.

*1. Stalin refused to release American prisoners......they die in his captivity.*

a. FDR died April 12th..but, based on Marshall's order,  the White House clearly knew of the following prior to that:

" By May 15, 1945, the Pentagon believed *25,000 American POWs "liberated" by the Red Army were still being held hostage* to Soviet demands that all "Soviet citizens" be returned to Soviet control, "without exception" and by force if necessary, as agreed to at the Yalta Conference in February 1945. When the U.S. refused to return some military formations composed of Soviet citizens, such as the First Ukrainian SS Division, *Stalin retaliated by returning only 4,116 of the hostage American POWs. On June 1, 1945, the United States Government issued documents, signed by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, explaining away the loss of approximately 20,000 POWs remaining under Stalin's control." *http://www.nationalalliance.org/wwii/wwii.htm

National Alliance of Families


b. "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.

T*he 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



I ripped you a new one.....again,huh?

Hard to believe how stupid you are.


----------



## Unkotare

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> *In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is really easy.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he did.
> He not only invaded, but has never relinquished control of the Democrat Party.
> That explains why today's Democrat Party stands for the same things the Communist Party did.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
Click to expand...





An illogical, disingenuous BS post. ^^^^^


----------



## Syriusly

bear513 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't?????????
> 
> 
> The Forsaken: Americans in Stalin's gulags
Click to expand...


Stalin did not declare war on the United States- pretty sure that is accurate.....

120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union

Now- why exactly are you so excited at the idea of millions of GI's dying to defeat a Soviet Union that would fall under its own weight a few decades later?


----------



## PoliticalChic

10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma...

"Prisoners were being drawn into the Soviet penal system in large numbers during the initial period of Kolyma's development, most notably from the so-calledanti-Kulakcampaign and the government's internal war *to forcecollectivization*on the USSR's peasantry. These prisoners formed a readily available workforce."   Kolyma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"A group of prisoners at Kolyma were hungry enough to eat a horse that had been dead for more than a week (despite the stench and the infestation of flies and maggots).... Goldmining could break a strong man's health forever in three weeks. A three-week logging term was likewise known as a ‘dry execution'.

At Serpantinka, the_anus mundi_of the gulag, prisoners were crammed upright into a shed so tightly that they were denied the use of their arms.


According to Solzhenitsyn, almost all women prisoners - many of them wives and mothers - would sooner or later find themselves walking up and down the corridors between the men's bunks saying, ‘Half a kilo. Half a kilo':

"Even if we add the total losses of the Second World War (40-50 million) to the losses of the Holocaust (_c_. 6 million),*we arrive at a figure which, apparently, Bolshevism can seriously rival.*

Civil War, Red Terror, famine; Collectivization accounted for perhaps 11 million, Conquest suggests; Solzhenitsyn gives a figure (‘a modest estimate') of *40-50 million who were given long sentences in the gulag from 1917 to 1953* (and many followed after the brief Khrushchev thaw); and then there is the Great Terror, the deportations of peoples in the 1940s and 1950s (‘the specially displaced'), Afghanistan…

The ‘twenty million' begins to look more like the forty million. Of course, the figures are still not secure, and they vary dismayingly. But these are not the ‘imaginary' zeros of the millennium, and we will certainly need seven of them in*our inventory of the Soviet experiment.*
Koba The Dread," Amis



This is what Roosevelt saw as eligible for American alliance: a dictatorship that slaughtered its own citizens.

This is the view of Ronald Reagan: "I went to Reykjavik determined that everything was negotiable except two things, our freedom and our future."

Roosevelt....the Un-Reagan.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ".... but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't-..."
> .
Click to expand...


As I said

Hitler declared war on the United States.

Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.

Stalin did not declare war on the United States

120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.

I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed 120,0000 Americans GI's- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.

Any real American.....

But then again- not to a Hitler apologist like you.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....



Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.
Click to expand...



Why are you lying?

Oh....because I reveal the truth, and that makes it tough for a boot-licker trained to defend the indefensible.

It's clear.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you lying?
> 
> Oh....because I reveal the truth, and that makes it tough for a boot-licker trained to defend the indefensible.
> 
> It's clear.
Click to expand...


You just post your usual anti-American crap.

Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States

Oh here is a fun question of the following men- which one do admire the least as a leader?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Adolf Hitler
Joseph Stalin


----------



## rightwinger

FDR defeated Japan

Reagan defeated Grenada

That is why Political Chic is so confused


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down



Actually he helped create the wall.

You might want to make sure your history is aligned.

I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.

Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.

If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.

If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.

We'll never know.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
Click to expand...


I read what he posts.

Your cut and pastes are no better.


----------



## Wyatt earp

Syriusly said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 9. They say the winners write the history....and the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats are clearly the dominant political movement today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't?????????
> 
> 
> The Forsaken: Americans in Stalin's gulags
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States- pretty sure that is accurate.....
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union
> 
> Now- why exactly are you so excited at the idea of millions of GI's dying to defeat a Soviet Union that would fall under its own weight a few decades later?
Click to expand...


Again millions? Yea Lmao ok.

_____________________________________

Patton On Communism And The Khazar Jews

"I understand the situation. Their (the Soviet) supply system is inadequate to maintain them in a serious action such as I could put to them. They have chickens in the coop and cattle on the hoof -- that's their supply system. They could probably maintain themselves in the type of fighting I could give them for five days. After that it would make no difference how many million men they have, and if you wanted Moscow I could give it to you. They lived on the land coming down. There is insufficient left for them to maintain themselves going back. Let's not give them time to build up their supplies. If we do, then . . . we have had a victory over the Germans and disarmed them, but we have failed in the liberation of Europe; we have lost the war!" ~ Patton

Patton knew that the Americans could whip the Reds then -- but perhaps not later. On May 18 he noted in his diary:
"In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better
_____________________________________

And quit trying to play arm chair quarter back, how old are you anyways by saying that? I know a couple of people that came (who escaped)from east (at the time) Germany and Poland.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.
Click to expand...


There was an interesting theory on this.

If Hilter had not created two fronts, he would have battled the Soviets harder and depleated them.  He would not have won.  

Had that happened, he still would have lost and Russia would have been spent...no Iron Curtain.

This didn't happen because of the sabre rattling of the Brits and the U.S.

I found it, at least, plausible.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
Click to expand...

FDR saved Western Europe
Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them

To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians

Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
Click to expand...


Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.  

Please don't be such a liar.

You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.

FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.  

I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.

Can you be any more stupid ?


----------



## Syriusly

bear513 said:


> e, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better
> .



While I have respect for Patton as a very good tactician and probably the foremost American armored general that quote is frankly just ignorant. 

Which is entirely possible- since at that time Patton very well was ignorant of the real capabilities of the Soviet Army in Eastern Europe.

Far from lacking artillery, the Soviets specialized in massed artillery bombardments as they approached Berlin.
For the Battle of Berlin alone- the Soviets had 41,000 pieces of artillery.

Armor- 6250 tanks and SP guns- all of them superior to any American tanks except for the twenty or so M26's that were in combat in 1945.

How much armor did Patton have under his command?

Well lets compare to the Battle of the Bulge- 1600 tanks and tank destroyers. 4,100 artillery pieces.

As I mentioned- air power was the only advantage the U.S. had.

But there was another obstacle- Americans didn't want to go to war with the USSR.

At that point- the USSR was our ally- and Americans wanted them to join in with us fighting the Japanese


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was an interesting theory on this.
> 
> If Hilter had not created two fronts, he would have battled the Soviets harder and depleated them.  He would not have won.
> 
> Had that happened, he still would have lost and Russia would have been spent...no Iron Curtain.
> 
> This didn't happen because of the sabre rattling of the Brits and the U.S.
> 
> I found it, at least, plausible.
Click to expand...


Let us remember the time line
Hitler was at war the Britain, France etc first
Then attacked the USSR
Then declared war on the U.S.

The 'second front' was when he attacked the USSR. If he had not done that- and had not declared war on Britain- there is a reasonably good chance he would have defeated the Brits in North Africa and taken over the oil fields there also, eventually defeating Britain completely.


----------



## Syriusly

bear513 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again- since you keep dodging answering why you seem to prefer Hitler dominated world, rather than American victory-
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> Joseph Stalin did not.
> Hitler's war cost the lives of around 120,000 Americans
> Stalin's non-war with Americans cost considerably fewer American lives than that.
> 
> However, an Un-American traitor like you still loves you your Hitler.
> 
> Now- still waiting for you to reply as to why you wanted millions of Americans to die just so you can claim to be against Communism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you keep tap-dancing around this question.....the real defining question of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's character and judgment, ....
> "*In what way, by what metrics, was Hitler worse than .... Joseph Stalin?"
> 
> ....I'll do what you've proven incapable of handling.
> 
> 
> In no way.....none....is Hitler worse than Stalin.....
> ....Stalin, by every measure was the worse..*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you see- any American who had actually read actual history books would know that the United States fought a war with Germany because of Hitler.
> 
> Hitler declared war on the United States.
> 
> Over 120,000 American GI's died in that war.
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union.
> 
> I think Stalin was as terrible to Soviet citizens and Hitler was to his citizens- but since Hitler killed Americans- and Stalin didn't- any real American would conclude that Hitler was worse for America.
> 
> Any real American.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't?????????
> 
> 
> The Forsaken: Americans in Stalin's gulags
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin did not declare war on the United States- pretty sure that is accurate.....
> 
> 120,000 American GI's did not die fighting the Soviet Union
> 
> Now- why exactly are you so excited at the idea of millions of GI's dying to defeat a Soviet Union that would fall under its own weight a few decades later?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again millions? Yea Lmao ok.
> 
> _____________________________________
> 
> Patton On Communism And The Khazar Jews
> 
> "I understand the situation. Their (the Soviet) supply system is inadequate to maintain them in a serious action such as I could put to them. They have chickens in the coop and cattle on the hoof -- that's their supply system. They could probably maintain themselves in the type of fighting I could give them for five days. After that it would make no difference how many million men they have, and if you wanted Moscow I could give it to you. They lived on the land coming down. There is insufficient left for them to maintain themselves going back. Let's not give them time to build up their supplies. If we do, then . . . we have had a victory over the Germans and disarmed them, but we have failed in the liberation of Europe; we have lost the war!" ~ Patton
> 
> Patton knew that the Americans could whip the Reds then -- but perhaps not later. On May 18 he noted in his diary:
> "In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better
> _____________________________________
> 
> And quit trying to play arm chair quarter back, how old are you anyways by saying that? I know a couple of people that came (who escaped)from east (at the time) Germany and Poland.
Click to expand...


And by the way- you left out this quote from Patton in the same article

These experiences and a great many others firmly convinced Patton that the Jews were an especially unsavory variety of creature and hardly deserving of all the official concern the American government was bestowing on them

He saw the demoralization of the Army as a deliberate goal of America's enemies:

"I have been just as furious as you at the compilation of lies which the communist and_ Semitic elements _of our government have leveled against me and practically every other commander. In my opinion it is a deliberate attempt to alienate the soldier vote from the commanders, because the communists know that soldiers are not communistic, and they fear what eleven million votes (of veterans) would do


----------



## whitehall

The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.


----------



## Syriusly

whitehall said:


> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.



Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.

Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks 
Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business

Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.


----------



## whitehall

Syriusly said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
Click to expand...

FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.


----------



## Syriusly

whitehall said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
Click to expand...


Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.

FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up. 

And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.

And you are still pissed off about that.

And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.

And you are still pissed off about that.

You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans


----------



## whitehall

Syriusly said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
Click to expand...

FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.


----------



## Camp

whitehall said:


> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.


If Watergate type incidents were so common, why have we not heard about them? You are claiming a sitting President had a secret team of burglars that among other criminal break-ins, robbed or attempted to rob the opposing parties headquarters. Show us a link to that claim, or admit it is just something made up to lesson the impact of the truth, Nixon was a crook.


----------



## Camp

whitehall said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
Click to expand...

"Mild recession"? What total nonsense and dishonesty. Look up Great Depression and every scholarly and academic account has it beginning with the market crash of 1929. As another poster has pointed out, the unemployment was up to 25% when FDR came into the Presidency four years after the market crash and the Depression was in full swing. Notice the FDR critics always leave out a little piece of information about a thing called the Dust Bowl. They play like the Dust Bowl storms that destroyed the agriculture industry in vast stretches of America never happened. Those who look up the Dust Bowl will quickly understand how dishonest the attacks on FDR are. The nation had to deal with a series of natural disasters during the entire time of FDR's Presidency.


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
Click to expand...


Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.

Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.


----------



## Jroc

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
Click to expand...



Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot


----------



## Sallow

Jroc said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
Click to expand...


Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.

By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.


----------



## Jroc

Sallow said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
Click to expand...

That would be considered an option, not a mandate So you're not only a pencil neck, but a low I.Q. pencil neck ...You're all screwed up boy


----------



## Sallow

Jroc said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be considered an option, not a mandate So you're not only a pencil neck, but a low I.Q. pencil neck ...You're all screwed up boy
Click to expand...


Go to him Jroc, Anne Coulter that is..


You sho' ah one fine Quisling, ain't ya?


----------



## Jroc

Sallow said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be considered an option, not a mandate So you're not only a pencil neck, but a low I.Q. pencil neck ...You're all screwed up boy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Go to him Jroc, Anne Coulter that is..
> 
> 
> You sho' ah one fine Quisling, ain't ya?
Click to expand...



When Ann Coluter is running the country, and mandates all Jews become Christian you let me know boy. Why do you suck liberal ass, as they tell you how you have to live your life?


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
Click to expand...

Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany


----------



## Unkotare

Syriusly said:


> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.




I'm sure the Americans he threw into his concentration camps felt quite "protected."  The barbed wire and armed guard towers must have been so reassuring.


----------



## rightwinger

Camp said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Mild recession"? What total nonsense and dishonesty. Look up Great Depression and every scholarly and academic account has it beginning with the market crash of 1929. As another poster has pointed out, the unemployment was up to 25% when FDR came into the Presidency four years after the market crash and the Depression was in full swing. Notice the FDR critics always leave out a little piece of information about a thing called the Dust Bowl. They play like the Dust Bowl storms that destroyed the agriculture industry in vast stretches of America never happened. Those who look up the Dust Bowl will quickly understand how dishonest the attacks on FDR are. The nation had to deal with a series of natural disasters during the entire time of FDR's Presidency.
Click to expand...

Dust bowl is like global warming....never happened


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
Click to expand...


You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.

No threats...no nothing.

Rolled over and caved.

Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was an interesting theory on this.
> 
> If Hilter had not created two fronts, he would have battled the Soviets harder and depleated them.  He would not have won.
> 
> Had that happened, he still would have lost and Russia would have been spent...no Iron Curtain.
> 
> This didn't happen because of the sabre rattling of the Brits and the U.S.
> 
> I found it, at least, plausible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let us remember the time line
> Hitler was at war the Britain, France etc first
> Then attacked the USSR
> Then declared war on the U.S.
> 
> The 'second front' was when he attacked the USSR. If he had not done that- and had not declared war on Britain- there is a reasonably good chance he would have defeated the Brits in North Africa and taken over the oil fields there also, eventually defeating Britain completely.
Click to expand...


His plan was always to go after the USSR.  He hated them with a passion.

He did what he simply felt he needed to do.

The fact that he went at Britain first means only that their sabre rattling got his attention.  He also had not counted on the U.S. coming to their aid.  Of course, if Britain and France been more prepared and willing to fight, he might have seen them as more difficult targets.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Mild recession"? What total nonsense and dishonesty. Look up Great Depression and every scholarly and academic account has it beginning with the market crash of 1929. As another poster has pointed out, the unemployment was up to 25% when FDR came into the Presidency four years after the market crash and the Depression was in full swing. Notice the FDR critics always leave out a little piece of information about a thing called the Dust Bowl. They play like the Dust Bowl storms that destroyed the agriculture industry in vast stretches of America never happened. Those who look up the Dust Bowl will quickly understand how dishonest the attacks on FDR are. The nation had to deal with a series of natural disasters during the entire time of FDR's Presidency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dust bowl is like global warming....never happened
Click to expand...


Clearly, your programming is stuck in a stupid loop.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
Click to expand...

There was nothing to bargain

You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for

What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?


----------



## Syriusly

whitehall said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
Click to expand...


'amazingly there was no national intelligence agency'!
What is amazing about that to you? The United States had never had one and after WW1 was fiercely isolationist- would it have been good if FDR's administration had created on sooner- sure- but FDR's administration was the first one to create a national intelligence agency- the OSS.

And FDR underestimating the Nazi threat was hardly unique- it was pervasive in the United States and in Great Britain. However, FDR did recognize the Nazi threat prior to pretty much everyone else in the United States- remember even Charles Lindburgh was touring the United States lecturing about how the United States should stay out of European matters and praising Hitler.

No doubt that FDR got lots of things wrong- but the facts are very clear- FDR pushed and pushed to start getting our military and industry ready for the war in the late 1930's- and then lead the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.

And you Conservatives have never forgiven him for that.


----------



## Syriusly

Unkotare said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure the Americans he threw into his concentration camps felt quite "protected."  The barbed wire and armed guard towers must have been so reassuring.
Click to expand...


Oh certainly the Japanese Internment was one of FDR's biggest mistakes- and one of the biggest human rights violations in our history.

No excuses- FDR screwed the pooch on that one.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
Click to expand...


Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.

Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.

The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally. 

FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.

What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?

And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 10. For context, and so that one can judge the veracity of Franklin *Roosevelt's claims of kinship between the United States and Soviet Bolshevik regime, *citizens of the latter were scooped up and sent to Kolyma....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting for you to explain why you wanted Hitler to defeat the USSR, and link up with Imperial Japan so they could combine their attacks on the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was an interesting theory on this.
> 
> If Hilter had not created two fronts, he would have battled the Soviets harder and depleated them.  He would not have won.
> 
> Had that happened, he still would have lost and Russia would have been spent...no Iron Curtain.
> 
> This didn't happen because of the sabre rattling of the Brits and the U.S.
> 
> I found it, at least, plausible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let us remember the time line
> Hitler was at war the Britain, France etc first
> Then attacked the USSR
> Then declared war on the U.S.
> 
> The 'second front' was when he attacked the USSR. If he had not done that- and had not declared war on Britain- there is a reasonably good chance he would have defeated the Brits in North Africa and taken over the oil fields there also, eventually defeating Britain completely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His plan was always to go after the USSR.  He hated them with a passion.
> 
> He did what he simply felt he needed to do.
> 
> The fact that he went at Britain first means only that their sabre rattling got his attention.  He also had not counted on the U.S. coming to their aid.  Of course, if Britain and France been more prepared and willing to fight, he might have seen them as more difficult targets.
Click to expand...


Do you really know nothing about the war?

Hitler's plan was always to invade Poland- and he knew that this risked a war with England and France. 
Which is exactly what happened.
It wasn't British 'sabre-rattling'- it was Great Britain and France declaring war on Germany after the invasion of Poland- and then aiding Norway and France and Denmark.

France was considered the most powerful army in the world prior to Germany's invasion

Hitler absolutely wanted to defeat the Russians- but he went to war with the Western Allies first- and was stupid to attack the Soviets while Great Britian was still a viable enemy- the British Navy in 1940 was considered the most powerful navy in the world.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
Click to expand...


Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.

Not to good at this....are you.

Neither was FDR.  

The major rollover and cave guy.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
Click to expand...


Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.

And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.

And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?

Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.

Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.


----------



## Dot Com

Jantje_Smit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?
> 
> 
> Could be this?
> "Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
> Coulter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You complain about lack of substance and then you quote Ann Coulter......
> 
> Too bad you conservative cultists don't do irony
Click to expand...


i know right?  Thats why no cons on this board go anywhere near her zany threads


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> How Reagan fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR fought WWII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WWII brought Roosevelt to his knees.....ideologically.
> 
> As he was a failure as a businessman, he hated those who were successful...and made that well known.
> 
> But the winds of war caused Roosevelt to come begging to private industry to pull his bacon out of the fire.
> 
> 
> 1.  For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”
> 
> 2.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> 
> 3.  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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now....see how it's done? My posts actually show education and knowledge.....unlike you Liberals who show nothing but mind-numbed devotion to demagogues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give up yet?
> 
> My cut and pastes are kicking the shit out of your cut and pastes
> 
> <hint:  I don't read the crap you post and neither does anyone else....want more pictures?>
Click to expand...

She thinks people actually read her clumsily copynpasted rw pablum?


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> Jantje_Smit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it that you Liberals/socialists can never author a substantive post?
> 
> 
> Could be this?
> "Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
> Coulter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You complain about lack of substance and then you quote Ann Coulter......
> 
> Too bad you conservative cultists don't do irony
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i know right?  Thats why no cons on this board go anywhere near her zany threads
Click to expand...




rightwinger said:


> How Reagan brought down a wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How FDR brought down a wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference between a "good" president and a GREAT president



Roosevelt wasn't even a "good" president.

But Reagan was a GREAT president.


----------



## Dot Com

What did Ronnie do during the war?


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
Click to expand...

That's where you guys always go off the deep end
Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em

First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin

Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin

Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.


Gutless enough to turn us into a military and economic superpower


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
Click to expand...


1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".

Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
Click to expand...




Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> Gutless enough to turn us into a military and economic superpower
Click to expand...


ROTFLMAO

He sank our Pacific Fleet.  

That was one his better accomplishments.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> What did Ronnie do during the war?



Who cares....?

Ronnie wasn't as GREAT as some people make him out to be.

But he was a whole lot better than FDR when it came to the basics.


----------



## PoliticalChic

whitehall said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
Click to expand...



"...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."

Threat???

FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.

He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'

War took him by surprise.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Jroc said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
Click to expand...


Actually they do.

The problem here is that you are confusing the far left with liberals.

True liberals hate the far left (and the far right).  

It's all about a public relations game used to push an agenda that restricts us in our liberties.

True liberals cherish liberty.  It's the far left that hates it.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
Click to expand...


The liberals who "formed this country" spent a lot of time trying to reconcile with the British.  They only went to war when there was no other hope.  They all didn't come across at the same time.

So, they were conservatives before they were liberals.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
Click to expand...




So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.

"FDR prepared the United States for war,..."

Of course he did no such thing.

FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Mild recession"? What total nonsense and dishonesty. Look up Great Depression and every scholarly and academic account has it beginning with the market crash of 1929. As another poster has pointed out, the unemployment was up to 25% when FDR came into the Presidency four years after the market crash and the Depression was in full swing. Notice the FDR critics always leave out a little piece of information about a thing called the Dust Bowl. They play like the Dust Bowl storms that destroyed the agriculture industry in vast stretches of America never happened. Those who look up the Dust Bowl will quickly understand how dishonest the attacks on FDR are. The nation had to deal with a series of natural disasters during the entire time of FDR's Presidency.
Click to expand...


Another FDR boot-licker.


America’s greatest depression fighter was Warren Gamaliel Harding. An Ohio senator when he was elected president in 1920, he followed Woodrow Wilson who got America into World War I, .

..*Harding inherited the mess, in particular the post-World War I depression – almost as severe, from peak to trough, as the Great Contraction from 1929 to 1933, that FDR inherited and prolonged.* 

Richard K. Vedder and Lowell E. Gallaway, in their book Out of Work (1993), noted that* the magnitude of the 1920 depression "exceeded that for the Great Depression of the following decade for several quarters." *The estimated gross national product plunged 24% from $91.5 billion in 1920 to $69.6 billion in 1921. The number of unemployed people jumped from 2.1 million in 1920 to 4.9 million in 1921.
America’s Greatest Depression*Fighter by Jim Powell

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig4/powell-jim4.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/226645/not-so-great-depression/jim-powell


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
Click to expand...



I love it when I reduce you to that worn out lie.


The Socialist Party changed its name to "liberal" at the behest of John Dewey.
The modern Liberal, you, are the scions of that socialist party.


Now....the Founders, they were Classical Liberals....known today as conservatives.

Their fundamental ideas were based on* individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.*



No socialists, communists, Nazis,* Liberals, *fascists, nor Progressives can make that claim.



Now, write soon, y'hear.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sallow said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> and proudly noted during his 1988 campaign for president that he had threatened to “go public” with covert action plans by the Reagan administration, causing them to cancel the operations."
> Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
Click to expand...



He nailed you, didn't he.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
Click to expand...

Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?

1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally

2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal

3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
Click to expand...

It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
Click to expand...




rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
Click to expand...




Roosevelt offered Eastern Europe to Stalin as his prom gift.....hoping for a peck on the cheek.

*Harry Hopkins and George Marshall were fully behind handing all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin's tender mercies. *

*Remember...they knew of the Terror Famine, the Katyn Forest Massacre, and other blood purges. by Stalin. *

*Evidence can be seen in a document which Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,".....*

*"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."*


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
Click to expand...




Any 'shame' is all yours.

You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
Click to expand...


You are a complete idiot.

1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.

2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.

3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
Click to expand...

It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster

But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games

Your choice, I guess


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
Click to expand...


FDR had no assurance the atomic bomb would work before he died. It wasn't even tested until three months after he died. I don't think Stalin would have been impressed

You still haven't explained how we get the Red Army to give back captured territory.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
Click to expand...


This more or less translates to an admission of getting your ass kicked.

Which is clear to anyone who reads this thread.

Time to resort to the appendix in your book of brownshirt tactics.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the atomic bomb would work before he died. It wasn't even tested until three months after he died. I don't think Stalin would have been impressed
> 
> You still haven't explained how we get the Red Army to give back captured territory.
Click to expand...


I've explained it....you simply can't comprehend it.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
Click to expand...


BTW:

I don't agree with her half the time.

On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> A Senator threatened to go public if President Reagan and the CIA took part in illegal covert actions?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He nailed you, didn't he.
Click to expand...


Not getting nailed, lately PC? Lighten up on the bon bons. Put a little time in the gym. Maybe you can get hubby back from the massage parlors.


----------



## Sallow

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
Click to expand...


Most of the war happened in Russia. That's were most German Troops met their demise. The United States was mostly at war with Japan. Not since the Mongols has any foreign power successfully taken over Russia and those that tried met with bloody defeat.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
Click to expand...


Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too

If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
Click to expand...


This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.

Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..


----------



## rightwinger

Sallow said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most of the war happened in Russia. That's were most German Troops met their demise. The United States was mostly at war with Japan. Not since the Mongols has any foreign power successfully taken over Russia and those that tried met with bloody defeat.
Click to expand...

I can't believe these morons are still fighting how WWII ended knowing that the Soviets collapsed in 45 years without a fight


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Sallow said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most of the war happened in Russia. That's were most German Troops met their demise. The United States was mostly at war with Japan. Not since the Mongols has any foreign power successfully taken over Russia and those that tried met with bloody defeat.
Click to expand...


And who suggested taking over Russia ?

Certainly not me.

It's to big......and they are well practiced at scorched earth.

That was the point of an earlier post.  

It's to bad some just can't let got of their left wing devotion to understand that.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
Click to expand...


And you can't even refute that.

Wow.


----------



## rightwinger

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
Click to expand...


She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona



.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most of the war happened in Russia. That's were most German Troops met their demise. The United States was mostly at war with Japan. Not since the Mongols has any foreign power successfully taken over Russia and those that tried met with bloody defeat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't believe these morons are still fighting how WWII ended knowing that the Soviets collapsed in 45 years without a fight
Click to expand...


Yep....

We've got ours (liberties).....screw them.

I am sure the people in Eastern Europe who died under Stalin's rule would be very undertsanding.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
Click to expand...


Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
Click to expand...


I have on plenty of occasions.  And I've always found that when I engage with information she is willing to respond.  I've learned a great deal from her.

You on the other hand.......are worthless and post nothing but your brownshirt propaganda.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He nailed you, didn't he.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not getting nailed, lately PC? Lighten up on the bon bons. Put a little time in the gym. Maybe you can get hubby back from the massage parlors.
Click to expand...


Personal attacks ?

You must be a rightwinger disciple.  

Can't win ?  Change direction.


----------



## Jroc

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
Click to expand...


I don't think he's consciously lying. Hes just ignorant


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Jroc said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think he's consciously lying. Hes just ignorant
Click to expand...


NOBODY is THAT stupid.


----------



## Jroc

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 *Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths*. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
Click to expand...



Stalin didn't take shit, he was incompetent, which is why Russia took so many deaths. When he finally started letting his generals run the war, is when Russia turned the tide..Stalin was a joke, who is partially responsible for the slaughter


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
Click to expand...

Actually, when dealing with Political Chic

Pee Wee is more than enough


----------



## Jroc

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
Click to expand...


lol..actually she's got ten times the intellect of an idiot like yourself


----------



## rightwinger

Jroc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 *Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths*. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't take shit, he was incompetent, which is why Russia took so many deaths. When he finally started letting his generals run the war, is when Russia turned the tide..Stalin was a joke, who is partially responsible for the slaughter
Click to expand...

True
But it doesn't negate the suffering the Soviets endured and the massive deaths. To think they were going to just turn back Eastern Europe to FDR or anyone is ridiculous


----------



## rightwinger

Jroc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> lol..actually she's got ten times the intellect of an idiot like yourself
Click to expand...

Maybe it would help if she used it


----------



## Jroc

rightwinger said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 *Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths*. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't take shit, he was incompetent, which is why Russia took so many deaths. When he finally started letting his generals run the war, is when Russia turned the tide..Stalin was a joke, who is partially responsible for the slaughter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True
> But it doesn't negate the suffering the Soviets endured and the massive deaths. To think they were going to just turn back Eastern Europe to FDR or anyone is ridiculous
Click to expand...



Needless suffering was because of Stalin, he threw men into the fight and, could less how many were slaughtered because of his stupidity


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Jroc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 *Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths*. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't take shit, he was incompetent, which is why Russia took so many deaths. When he finally started letting his generals run the war, is when Russia turned the tide..Stalin was a joke, who is partially responsible for the slaughter
Click to expand...


Even Russian Generals tended to plan less and depend more on numbers...thus sacrificing soldiers to the concept of brute force with few tactics.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
Click to expand...


But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.

You are pathetic.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> lol..actually she's got ten times the intellect of an idiot like yourself
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe it would help if she used it
Click to expand...


You'd do well to follow you own advice.  

As little as it is...it would be better than what you do now.


----------



## Jroc

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 *Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths*. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't take shit, he was incompetent, which is why Russia took so many deaths. When he finally started letting his generals run the war, is when Russia turned the tide..Stalin was a joke, who is partially responsible for the slaughter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even Russian Generals tended to plan less and depend more on numbers...thus sacrificing soldiers to the concept of brute force with few tactics.
Click to expand...

that's considered an accomplishment to "right winger"


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
Click to expand...





"Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths."

OMG....you are a moron....as well as a lying FDR boot-licker.

Stalin killed the 20 million.

20 million of his own citizens.....that's what dictators do.


*World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. *

*When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army.              *
* "The Secret Betrayal"by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.*


*"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." 
Georgy Zhukov hero file


Stalin benefited because he was the dominatrix to FDR.
And FDR loved it.
*


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
Click to expand...

I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining

Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the atomic bomb would work before he died. It wasn't even tested until three months after he died. I don't think Stalin would have been impressed
> 
> You still haven't explained how we get the Red Army to give back captured territory.
Click to expand...




FDR gave his lover, Uncle Joe,  the plans and uranium.

"Major George Lacey Jordan started a diary in 1942 when, as liaison to Soviet officials receiving materiel via lend-lease, he grew suspicious about the nature of these airborne shipments from the US over the Arctic to the USSR.

Stationed at Great Falls, Montana, Major Jordan documented evidence that Americans high up within the FDR administration were providing the USSR with the raw materials, technology, equipment, and know-how to make atomic bombs. And this at a time when our own were still under development in supposed secrecy.

As catalogued in the diaries,* all the materiel required for the creation of an atomic pile was transferred to the USSR *as early as 1942. The materiel included ‘bomb powder’ (uranium oxide), graphite in numerous forms, cadmium, cobalt, thorium, and $13,000,000 worth of aluminum tubes.

Major Jordan did not get very far pressing his concerns with the powers that be. However, by 1944 his boss General Groves had learned of the plot and managed to put a stop to further *shipments of.atomic materials.*

The full significance of these Lend-Lease shipments was not made clear to Major Jordan until February 1950 when he picked up a copy of Life magazine. Inside was an illustrated article on the atom bomb:

‘I learned for the first time that a plutonium pile consists of giant blocks of graphite, surrounded by heavy walls of concrete and honeycombed with aluminum tubes. In these tubes, it was related, are inserted slugs of natural uranium, containing one per cent of U-235. The intensity of the operation was declared to be governed by means of cadmium rods.’

So illuminating was this information that he carried this article with him during one of his appearances before the House Un-American Activities Committee."

Major Jordan’s observations were later published in the book:
From Major Jordan's Diaries
© 1952 by George Racey Jordan, USAF (Ret.)
with Richard L. Stokes
Originally published in 1952 by
Harcourt, Brace & Company, New York
Reprinted by American Opinion, 1961
Major Jordans Diaries  How Lend-Lease diverted Atomic Materials to the USSR - Historum - History Forums


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Democrat Liberals have regularly been traitors to America.
> 
> 1. *[Democrat] Senator Pat Leahy *was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. ....disclosed a top-secret communications intercept ...Leahy *leaked secret information *about a 1986 covert operation planned by the Reagan administration ...had to resign his Intelligence Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information ....
> American Chronicle | Sen. Leahy to FBI Director: Give Me Secret Information
> 
> 2. In 1983, *[Democrat] Sen. Edward M. Kennedy offered to help the Soviets *mount a public-relations offensive in the United States. Ted Kennedy sides with Soviets. Traitor [Archive] - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
> 
> 3. Freeh: "Unfortunately, the* [Clinton] White House was unable or unwilling to help the FBI *gain access to these critical witnesses. The only direction from the Clinton administration regarding Iran was to order the FBI to stop photographing and fingerprinting official Iranian delegations entering the U.S. because it was adversely impacting our "relationship" with Tehran. "
> 
> BTW, Freeh: "I finally turned to the former* President Bush, who immediately interc*eded with Crown Prince Abdullah on the FBI's behalf. Mr. Bush personally asked the Saudis to let the FBI do one-on-one interviews of the detained Khobar bombers. The Saudis immediately acceded."
> Remember Khobar Towers by Louis J. Freeh
> Michelle Malkin » KHOBAR TOWERS: 10 YEARS LATER
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Here at home, *the Obama administration has gravely impaired *our capability to gather human intelligence by declassifying hundreds of pages of documents that explain our interrogation techniques—information that is now probably in al-Qaeda training manuals. https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2009&month=10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He nailed you, didn't he.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not getting nailed, lately PC? Lighten up on the bon bons. Put a little time in the gym. Maybe you can get hubby back from the massage parlors.
Click to expand...




And so the only kind of post Leftists are capable of....

...after you've been revealed as an ignorant, dishonest, acolyte of the Left.


It's the Liberals version of licking your wounds.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
Click to expand...




So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?

Wanna guess?


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?
> 
> Wanna guess?
Click to expand...

I gave up reading your posts years ago
Not worth the effort.....I'd rather read Stephanie


----------



## Jroc

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> 
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?
> 
> Wanna guess?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I gave up reading your posts years ago
> Not worth the effort.....I'd rather read Stephanie
Click to expand...



So you respond to post you don't read?


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.
> 
> "FDR prepared the United States for war,..."
> 
> Of course he did no such thing.
> 
> FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
Click to expand...

You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
Click to expand...



Oh.....look...an "is not, is noottttttt!" post by a Liberal.


Again:
FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.

He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'

War took him by surprise.

All true.



See if you can do better than 'is not.'


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most of the war happened in Russia. That's were most German Troops met their demise. The United States was mostly at war with Japan. Not since the Mongols has any foreign power successfully taken over Russia and those that tried met with bloody defeat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't believe these morons are still fighting how WWII ended knowing that the Soviets collapsed in 45 years without a fight
Click to expand...




'Collapsed' due to the man who did the opposite of what Roosevelt did....

Hence, "Roosevevelt- the Un-Reagan."


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling
Click to expand...



It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
...time for more B-12 shots?

1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.

2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.

Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.

And it will continue so.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The media brought down the Nixon administration over a second rate burglary that was common in FDR, Truman, JFK and LBJ's time. Imagine what the media could have done to the FDR administration if they weren't in the tank for democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.
> 
> "FDR prepared the United States for war,..."
> 
> Of course he did no such thing.
> 
> FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
> Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.
Click to expand...




And yet another lie.


Clean that boot-black off your tongue.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had eight years to access the potential enemies of the U.S. but amazingly there was no national intelligence agency. The book "in the garden of the beasts" illustrates the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms. The FDR administration's racist based "intelligence" of Japan's threat defies understanding. FDR never prepared the US for war but war was the only thing that could recover the administration in it's 3rd term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...the FDR administration's unique ability to underestimate the Nazi threat for his first two terms."
> 
> Threat???
> 
> FDR was on excellent terms with both Hitler and Stalin.....and Mussolini.
> 
> He was a junior class dictator, and wanted to join the 'big boys.'
> 
> War took him by surprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is possibly the most ridiculous post made by you.
> 
> Didn't think you could do it? But there it is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...



Could be far worse.....I could be like you, lying for the American despot.


----------



## Wry Catcher

PoliticalChic said:


> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?



I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 *Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths*. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't take shit, he was incompetent, which is why Russia took so many deaths. When he finally started letting his generals run the war, is when Russia turned the tide..Stalin was a joke, who is partially responsible for the slaughter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True
> But it doesn't negate the suffering the Soviets endured and the massive deaths. To think they were going to just turn back Eastern Europe to FDR or anyone is ridiculous
Click to expand...




The suffering and deaths. from 1933 in, should be laid at the feet of Franklin Roosevelt, without whose aid and comfort, Soviet communism would not have remained dominant. 

He ignored genocide, slaughter, illegality, and incompetence, and oppression by his idol, Joseph "Kobal" Stalin



The *Nazis burned the evidence*....the *communists mass graved them*....and sometimes the earth gave up its evidence...as happened in the frozen gulags of Siberia....


" These graves, enormous stone pits, were filled to the brim with corpses. The bodies had not decayed; they were just bare skeletons over which stretched dirty, scratched skin bitten all over by lice.

The north resisted with all its strength this work of man, not accepting the corpses into its bowels. Defeated, humbled, retreating, stone promised to forget nothing, to wait and preserve its secret. The severe winters, the hot summers, the winds, the six years of rain had not wrenched the dead men from the stone. The earth opened, baring its subterranean storerooms, for they contained not only gold and lead, tungsten and uranium, but also undecaying human bodies.


These human bodies slid down the slope, perhaps attempting to arise. From a distance, from the other side of the creek, I had previously seen these moving objects that caught up against branches and stones; I had seen them through the few trees still left standing and I thought that they were logs that had not yet been hauled away.


Now the mountain was laid bare, and its secret was revealed. The grave "opened," and the dead men slid down the stony slope. Near the tractor road an enormous new common grave was dug. Who had dug it? No one was taken from the barracks for this work. It was enormous, and I and my companions knew that if we were to freeze and die, place would be found for us in this new grave, this housewarming for dead men.


The bulldozer scraped up the frozen bodies,* thousands of bodies of thousands of skeleton-like corpses. *Nothing had decayed: the twisted fingers, the pus-filled toes which were reduced to mere stumps after frostbite, the dry skin scratched bloody and eyes burning with a hungry gleam."                                                                                  The American Dissident


Roosevelt knew...yet he made certain that Soviet Communism survived and found a cozy home in his administration.
He even had one of Stalin's spies live in the White House.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
Click to expand...



Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.


Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:

http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==

http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==


"The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.

 "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.
> 
> "FDR prepared the United States for war,..."
> 
> Of course he did no such thing.
> 
> FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
> Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet another lie.
Click to expand...


Let's start proving your lie with this.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-17_Flying_Fortress


----------



## rightwinger

Jroc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?
> 
> Wanna guess?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I gave up reading your posts years ago
> Not worth the effort.....I'd rather read Stephanie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So you respond to post you don't read?
Click to expand...


I speak to the topic of her threads
What she actually posts does little to support the topic


----------



## Wry Catcher

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.
> 
> 
> Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
Click to expand...


I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.

Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> She is channeling her inner Ann Coulter persona
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
> ...time for more B-12 shots?
> 
> 1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
> You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.
> 
> 2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
> Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
> And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.
> 
> Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.
> 
> And it will continue so.
Click to expand...


I'd rather engage in an intellectual discussion with Stephanie

She brings more to the table


----------



## Dot Com

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> What did Ronnie do during the war?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares....?
> 
> Ronnie wasn't as GREAT as some people make him out to be.
> 
> But he was a whole lot better than FDR when it came to the basics.
Click to expand...

ROFL. That kind of answer might've gotten yourself & PoliticalSpice (OP) through elementary school but it aint going to work here Hack Devil 92


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> Gutless enough to turn us into a military and economic superpower
Click to expand...

That one has been a rw hack since Day 1. I think he may actually believe his own lies which is scary


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he helped create the wall.
> 
> You might want to make sure your history is aligned.
> 
> I don't dislike FDR like some.  I just don't believe he was as great as some make him out to be.  Of course, I accord Ronald Reagan the same thing.
> 
> Considering their circumstances, they both did O.K.
> 
> If Reagan had been in office during WWII, he might have cut lose the army on Russia.  Which would have been a disaster.
> 
> If Roosevelt had been in office during the 1980's, we might not have recovered like we did.
> 
> We'll never know.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense by an FDR boot-licker.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a shame that you are unable to contribute anything of value to your own thread
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any 'shame' is all yours.
> 
> You lie even when lying is unnecessary....beginning with your avi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's sad really....you could actually be a good poster
> 
> But you sold out to play your Ann Coulter cut and paste games
> 
> Your choice, I guess
Click to expand...

she thinks it makes her look intelligent using Coulter quotes


----------



## Wry Catcher

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
> ...time for more B-12 shots?
> 
> 1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
> You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.
> 
> 2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
> Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
> And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.
> 
> Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.
> 
> And it will continue so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd rather engage in an intellectual discussion with Stephanie
> 
> She brings more to the table
Click to expand...


I agree, but I have to complain, when i read your post I had just sipped my coffee and LOL which required a quick screen cleaning.


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
> 
> 
> 
> That's where you guys always go off the deep end
> Your response to every situation is ...Nuke em
> 
> First of all .....FDR did not have a working atomic bomb when he negotiated with Stalin
> 
> Second, if the U.S. Resorted to nuclear devastation to take over the USSR....we would have been considered worse than Stalin
> 
> Third, the USSR folded on its own 45 years later without violence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. Once he had it, he could have "re-opened" negotiations.
> 2. You have no idea of what you talk about.  Stalin essentially took over half of Europe.  Tell me again why we went to war with Germany.  I would not have felt bad in that situation.  The left and right are all talk.  As you are prone to say "I've got mine...screw the rest of you.".  Liberty is great as long as you've got it....who cares.
> 3. 45 years of tyranny and mass murder....."I've got mine.....you'll get over it.".
> 
> Who are "you guys".  You have no idea of who I am.  I am certainly not a far right wing disciple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Revisionist history for global domination is fun isn't it?
> 
> 1. FDR died in April 1945. The bomb wasn't tested till July 1945 with Hiroshima in August. FDR couldn't negotiate anything and by August 1945, Europe was already divided and America would not have tolerated extending the war against a former ally
> 
> 2 Stalin "took over" half of Europe at the cost of 20 million deaths. We "took over " the other half at a cost of around 200,000 deaths.....looks like we got the better deal
> 
> 3. 45 years of Cold War is preferable to starting a nuclear war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are complete idiot.
> 
> 1. To bad it didn't happen sooner.  The bomb didn't suddenly show up.  He knew it was coming.  But that does not matter.  He had it.  He didn't try to use it as leverage.  Gutless.
> 
> 2. Your constant repeat of this lie does not make it any less a lie.
> 
> 3. Yep....we got ours....screw Eastern Europe.  BTW there was no nuclear war to start.  Can you be any more stupid ?  Russia didn't have the bomb.  You need to get an updated book of talking points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the atomic bomb would work before he died. It wasn't even tested until three months after he died. I don't think Stalin would have been impressed
> 
> You still haven't explained how we get the Red Army to give back captured territory.
Click to expand...

yeah Sun Hack 92 WITH sourcing backing-up your claims.


----------



## Searcher44

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
Click to expand...



I've seen that doc splashed on netflix for a while,  your recommendation might be the push I needed to give it a go. Docs are my go to genre there anyway.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.
> 
> "FDR prepared the United States for war,..."
> 
> Of course he did no such thing.
> 
> FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
> Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet another lie.
Click to expand...


You're the one telling the whopper. FDR's leadership got these weapons developed and America prepared.

M 1 Garrand
militaryhistory.about.com/od/smallarms/p/m1garrand.htmmilitaryhistory.about.com/od/smallarms/p/m1garrand.htm
P-38
militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp/aircraft_id=74

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning


----------



## Dot Com

Sun Devil 92 said:


> It's* to* big......and they are well practiced at scorched earth.
> 
> That was the point of an earlier post.
> 
> It's *to* bad some just can't let got of their left wing devotion to understand that.


not an oversight  Not one but TWO (not to  ) errors


----------



## PoliticalChic

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.
> 
> 
> Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.
> 
> Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).
Click to expand...



Watch your language, Liberal.


Documentation of the joined-at-the-hip relationship of Hitler and Stalin....and, therefore, Roosevelt.

"The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.

"Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983


Don't be afraid of education.....go ahead and watch the acclaimed documentary.


----------



## Wry Catcher

Searcher44 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen that doc splashed on netflix for a while,  your recommendation might be the push I needed to give it a go. Docs are my go to genre there anyway.
Click to expand...


Mine too.  Prohibition was interesting and temporal given the mood of the country in re Marijuana Laws.  I haven't watch The West yet, but the Civil War and Baseball have come and gone and they were terrific.


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling



She is just as unstable as our PoliticalSpice  though. No wonder she quotes her


----------



## PoliticalChic

Searcher44 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen that doc splashed on netflix for a while,  your recommendation might be the push I needed to give it a go. Docs are my go to genre there anyway.
Click to expand...



"The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.

"Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983



These were Roosevelt's pals.


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalChic said:


> It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
> ...time for more B-12 shots?
> 
> 1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
> You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.
> 
> 2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
> Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
> And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.
> 
> Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.
> 
> And it will continue so.


"Queen" Anne? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Thats not the first time I heard you use that term PoliticalSpice.


----------



## Wry Catcher

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.
> 
> 
> Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.
> 
> Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Watch your language, Liberal.
> 
> 
> Documentation of the joined-at-the-hip relationship of Hitler and Stalin....and, therefore, Roosevelt.
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> 
> Don't be afraid of education.....go ahead and watch the acclaimed documentary.
Click to expand...


I did read this link, but I didn't read the OP so I didn't lie.  

That said, there is no mention of FDR in The Soviet Story link, and what was described was the commonality of despotic rule in totalitarian societies.  A far cry from anything we've have encountered under FDR or any other POTUS and not something anyone knowledgeable and honest about the history of the 20th Century would dispute.


----------



## rightwinger

Reagan invaded Grenada
FDR invaded Europe

All you need to know


----------



## Dot Com

OP is right!!! 

FDR is the un-Reagan because he actually "did stuff" instead of making movies like the Gipper did for the duration of the war.

Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.
> 
> "FDR prepared the United States for war,..."
> 
> Of course he did no such thing.
> 
> FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
> Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet another lie.
Click to expand...

Who is the liar? I am losing track of all the examples I am posting to prove your lie about FDR doing very little to improve the military. FDR was behind the ESSEX Class carriers. Not a single one was sunk during all of WWII. Roosevelt knew a lot about Navel ships. 

en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Essex-class_aircraft_carrier


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> Reagan invaded Grenada
> FDR invaded Europe
> 
> All you need to know


That pretty much sums it up.


----------



## Dot Com

PoliSpice should take Trump's advice & either go back to Seoul or be interned 

this great nation owes a debt of gratitude to FDR that can never be repaid,


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

This thread serves as evidence of the genius of FDR, of his great accomplishments, and proof that government can work to the benefit of the American people – a fact most on the right hate and attempt to conceal, unsuccessfully; FDR was a far superior president than the likes of Reagan, even taking into account FDR's faults and failures.


----------



## Dot Com

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This thread serves as evidence of the genius of FDR, of his great accomplishments, and proof that government can work to the benefit of the American people – a fact most on the right hate and attempt to conceal, unsuccessfully; FDR was a far superior president than the likes of Reagan, even taking into account FDR's faults and failures.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.
> 
> 
> Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.
> 
> Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Watch your language, Liberal.
> 
> 
> Documentation of the joined-at-the-hip relationship of Hitler and Stalin....and, therefore, Roosevelt.
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> 
> Don't be afraid of education.....go ahead and watch the acclaimed documentary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did read this link, but I didn't read the OP so I didn't lie.
> 
> That said, there is no mention of FDR in The Soviet Story link, and what was described was the commonality of despotic rule in totalitarian societies.  A far cry from anything we've have encountered under FDR or any other POTUS and not something anyone knowledgeable and honest about the history of the 20th Century would dispute.
Click to expand...




Except for the fact that there wouldn't have been a Soviet communist totalitarian regime sans the tireless efforts of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.


----------



## Wry Catcher

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> I admit, I don't read threads by PC.  That said, for another opinion I suggest the reader who has access to Netflix watch the three part series on The Roosevelt's, TR & FDR.  Real history by real historians, fact based and with the perspective of the times in which they lived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.
> 
> 
> Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.
> 
> Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Watch your language, Liberal.
> 
> 
> Documentation of the joined-at-the-hip relationship of Hitler and Stalin....and, therefore, Roosevelt.
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> 
> Don't be afraid of education.....go ahead and watch the acclaimed documentary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did read this link, but I didn't read the OP so I didn't lie.
> 
> That said, there is no mention of FDR in The Soviet Story link, and what was described was the commonality of despotic rule in totalitarian societies.  A far cry from anything we've have encountered under FDR or any other POTUS and not something anyone knowledgeable and honest about the history of the 20th Century would dispute.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except for the fact that there wouldn't have been a Soviet communist totalitarian regime sans the tireless efforts of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Click to expand...


History by real historians, not partisan hacks:

_*The War Against Germany*: Despite these early battles in the Pacific, from the beginning of the war the U.S. and Great Britain agreed that their top priority was to defeat Hitler�s Germany, which was deemed the greater military threat. Japan could be finished off after Germany surrendered. The U.S. and Great Britain � the "Western Allies" � worked very closely together in planning and fighting the war. *There were tensions between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, however, which was fighting a savage war against Germany in the East. One recurring source of tension was the issue of a "Second Front." With Western Europe under his control, Hitler could concentrate his forces on attempting to defeat the Soviet Union. Joseph Stalin desperately wanted the Western Allies to open up a Second Front by invading Western Europe, thus forcing Germany to divided its forces between Eastern and Western Fronts. FDR repeatedly promised Stalin that a Second Front was imminent, but the more cautious Churchill always forced delays. Stalin, suspicious of western intentions, believed that the Western Allies were simply content to sit back and allow the Soviets to do all of the fighting and dying in the war against Hitler. The British, Americans, and Soviets remained Allies, but there were always undercurrents of suspicion and mistrust between them.

http://www.westga.edu/~hgoodson/World War II.htm*_


----------



## Dot Com

Wasn't Ronnie taking tips from Nancy's astrologer in later years of his presidency?


----------



## Wry Catcher

Dot Com said:


> Wasn't Ronnie taking tips from Nancy's astrologer in later years of his presidency?



The way he governed California, I suspect the astrologer was on this staff here.


----------



## Dot Com

Looky what I found w/ a simple search!!!



> Joan Quigley
> 
> *Joan Quigley*, the astrologer who helped determine*President Ronald Reagan*'s schedule and claimed to have convinced him to soften his stance toward the Soviet Union



Reagan


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

70 years since FDR's death.

70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.

70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.


----------



## Dot Com

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.


OP has FDRDS.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you read 'em.....and grind your teeth and pop antacids.
> 
> 
> Here's the film you and everyone should watch to learn what FDR endorsed:
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjQwMQ==
> 
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.
> 
> Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Watch your language, Liberal.
> 
> 
> Documentation of the joined-at-the-hip relationship of Hitler and Stalin....and, therefore, Roosevelt.
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> 
> Don't be afraid of education.....go ahead and watch the acclaimed documentary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did read this link, but I didn't read the OP so I didn't lie.
> 
> That said, there is no mention of FDR in The Soviet Story link, and what was described was the commonality of despotic rule in totalitarian societies.  A far cry from anything we've have encountered under FDR or any other POTUS and not something anyone knowledgeable and honest about the history of the 20th Century would dispute.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except for the fact that there wouldn't have been a Soviet communist totalitarian regime sans the tireless efforts of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> History by real historians, not partisan hacks:
> 
> _*The War Against Germany*: Despite these early battles in the Pacific, from the beginning of the war the U.S. and Great Britain agreed that their top priority was to defeat Hitler�s Germany, which was deemed the greater military threat. Japan could be finished off after Germany surrendered. The U.S. and Great Britain � the "Western Allies" � worked very closely together in planning and fighting the war. *There were tensions between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, however, which was fighting a savage war against Germany in the East. One recurring source of tension was the issue of a "Second Front." With Western Europe under his control, Hitler could concentrate his forces on attempting to defeat the Soviet Union. Joseph Stalin desperately wanted the Western Allies to open up a Second Front by invading Western Europe, thus forcing Germany to divided its forces between Eastern and Western Fronts. FDR repeatedly promised Stalin that a Second Front was imminent, but the more cautious Churchill always forced delays. Stalin, suspicious of western intentions, believed that the Western Allies were simply content to sit back and allow the Soviets to do all of the fighting and dying in the war against Hitler. The British, Americans, and Soviets remained Allies, but there were always undercurrents of suspicion and mistrust between them.
> 
> http://www.westga.edu/~hgoodson/World War II.htm*_
Click to expand...



Stop being such a moron.
Do your best.

1. There were lots of 'Second Fronts'...but the only one that Stalin would accept was way off in western France, so that he could grab all of Eastern Europe.

The first front was created by the Nazi attack, "Operation Barbarossa," and the constant *demands by Stalin *that the Allies open another front to draw off the Germans from Russia.

*The unspoken sentiment is that the Germans would defeat the Soviets*, and that they desperately needed that 'Second Front.'

What proof of that 'fear' exists? Looking at the great tank battle of Kursk, or a study of Russia's 'three greatest generals, December, January, and February,' certainly don't support same.

No, the truth is that *FDR's affections for Stalin and Soviet Communism found it useful to claim that without American support.....the end was near for Uncle Joe*


a. What does history tell us about similar attempts to conquer the Russian bear?

"Napoleon began his invasion 550 miles from Moscow and 420 miles from St. Petersburg. Hitler began his invasion from a similar distance."Why Russia Is Marching mdash and Eastern Europe Is Afraid - theTrumpet.com
How did that turn out for the attackers?

2. *So....what's all this about a dire need for a "Second Front"....and why did Stalin insist it had to be via the northwestern corner of the continent rather than the south, from Italy and the Adriatic?*
* 
And why forbid the allies to allow the surrender of Germany, which would have saved countless American lives?

More to the point....why did Roosevelt go along with this?
Starting to see the truth about Franklin Delano Roosevelt?*


3. * So.....did it really matter where the 'second front' is located?*
* Stalin was adamant about it forming via the northwestern edge of the continent rather than abide by Churchill's wish, Italy.


a. Consider the analysis of NYTimes Russia expert, Edwin James:
" ALLIED FRONT IN ITALY NOT SO FAR FROM REICH; In Other Words, It Is Just as Close to Germany From Any Peninsula Point As It Is From Dnieper THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE"
By EDWIN L. JAMES
September 12, 1943
Pay Articles from September 1943 Part 4 - Site Map - The New York Times

So....why did Stalin insist on the Allies opening the front at Normandy rather than the bases already conquered in Italy?

Here's why: he wanted the Red Army to cut Europe in half , as he would be able to occupy same.

And Roosevelt agreed with him....Roosevelt wanted to give all of Eastern Europe over to this homicidal maniac who slaughtered and oppressed millions!



b.Don't believe that that was the reason for Stalin's insistence on the "second front" being as far west as possible?

"Any time or any place where German forces are engaged by the American and the British represents good luck for Stalin. That is true because Hitler's strength is taxed just as much by fighting to the south as it would be fighting to the west."
Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 266.
How can one argue with that?*
*

Well.....only if "taxing Hitler's strength" wasn't the aim.....gaining the territory of central Europe for the Red Army was.



c. 'To withdraw from the European continent [Italy] to re-invade the European continent was simply crazy.'
Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p.195-196
Yet, Roosevelt sided with Stalin over Churchill, and over General Mark Clark, commander of the 5th US Army, in Italy.
Why?



Still care to deny that Stalin was in charge of Roosevelt's war efforts?
...and Stalin would get his way down to the last American casualty?

In the effort to install world-wide communism, any loss to either America, or to Germany, was a gain for Stalin.

Thank you, Franklin Roosevelt



Did you know that Eisenhower agreed with Churchill that Italy was the correct attack point.....until he was bought off by George Marshall with a fifth star?*

*Of course you didn't, you uneducated imbecile.*


----------



## PoliticalChic

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.





"70 years of rightwing failure,"

Ask Gorbachev about that, you imbecile.


----------



## PoliticalChic

According to Soviet records, in May of 1942,*Harry Hopkins privately coached Foreign Minister Molotov on what to say to FDR to overcome US military arguments against a 'second front' in France.
Eduard Mark, " Venona's source 19 and the 'Trident' Conference of May 1943: diplomacy or espionage?," p.20
(seeEBSEES Mark Eduard Venona s source 19 and the Trident Conference of May 1943 diplomacy or espionage*



 And “Mr. Molotoff Came to Plead for a Second Front,”_New York Times,_June 13, 1942.
And, referring to Soviet records of the Hopkins/Molotov meetings:                                    Harry Hopkins A Glimpse into the Russian Records - DocumentsTalk.com


----------



## PoliticalChic

* So....what, exactly, did Stalin want from American foreign policy? The call was for an Anglo-American 'second front,' in Western Europe, to draw German forces away from their attack on mother Russia, the putative 'first front.'

The astute should have noted thatthe real 'first front' was Poland, which had been attacked in 1939 by both Hitler and Stalin.
But, put that aside....


a. After Pearl Harbor, wasn't the South Pacifica second front?


b. Ten thousand American and Filipino troops were killed, and 20,000 wounded, atBataan.
How about a 'front' there?

c. How aboutNorth Africa?
In June, 1942, Rommel accepted surrender of the British, Tobruk, Libya. Rommel took more than 30,000 prisoners, 2,000 vehicles, 2,000 tons of fuel, and 5,000 tons of rations. Harry Hopkins and George Marshal 'vigorously opposed' any operation in North Africa, as it would delay the 'second front.'



Starting to get the picture?
The only "second front" that counted, according to Stalin and Roosevelt, was the one that Stalin named as the "second front."

Roosevelt: "I would rather lose New Zealand, Australia or anything else than have the Russian front collapse."
Robert Dallek, "Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945," p. 338.


Yup!
'Russia Uber Alles'

What nation did Roosevelt represent, again?*


----------



## Wry Catcher

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.



FDR was a great POTUS, in line with Washington, Lincoln, his Cousin TR and Jefferson.  

Ranking Every U.S. President from Worst to First

See the top 15, Conservatives read and weep.


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> I read the first sentence.  It's typical you, the genere of "ain't ____ awful"; the blank reserved for every Democratic President, all liberals, progressives and human beings who hold opinions which differ from your own.
> 
> Speaking to your opinions, they are biased, bullshit and boring.  You are predictable, partisan and pestiferous (I'll help you here, pestiferous: morally evil and dangerous to society).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch your language, Liberal.
> 
> 
> Documentation of the joined-at-the-hip relationship of Hitler and Stalin....and, therefore, Roosevelt.
> 
> "The Soviet Story," an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.
> 
> "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." http://www.economist.com/node/11401983
> 
> 
> Don't be afraid of education.....go ahead and watch the acclaimed documentary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did read this link, but I didn't read the OP so I didn't lie.
> 
> That said, there is no mention of FDR in The Soviet Story link, and what was described was the commonality of despotic rule in totalitarian societies.  A far cry from anything we've have encountered under FDR or any other POTUS and not something anyone knowledgeable and honest about the history of the 20th Century would dispute.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except for the fact that there wouldn't have been a Soviet communist totalitarian regime sans the tireless efforts of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> History by real historians, not partisan hacks:
> 
> _*The War Against Germany*: Despite these early battles in the Pacific, from the beginning of the war the U.S. and Great Britain agreed that their top priority was to defeat Hitler�s Germany, which was deemed the greater military threat. Japan could be finished off after Germany surrendered. The U.S. and Great Britain � the "Western Allies" � worked very closely together in planning and fighting the war. *There were tensions between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, however, which was fighting a savage war against Germany in the East. One recurring source of tension was the issue of a "Second Front." With Western Europe under his control, Hitler could concentrate his forces on attempting to defeat the Soviet Union. Joseph Stalin desperately wanted the Western Allies to open up a Second Front by invading Western Europe, thus forcing Germany to divided its forces between Eastern and Western Fronts. FDR repeatedly promised Stalin that a Second Front was imminent, but the more cautious Churchill always forced delays. Stalin, suspicious of western intentions, believed that the Western Allies were simply content to sit back and allow the Soviets to do all of the fighting and dying in the war against Hitler. The British, Americans, and Soviets remained Allies, but there were always undercurrents of suspicion and mistrust between them.
> 
> http://www.westga.edu/~hgoodson/World War II.htm*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being such a moron.
> Do your best.
> 
> 1. There were lots of 'Second Fronts'...but the only one that Stalin would accept was way off in western France, so that he could grab all of Eastern Europe.
> 
> The first front was created by the Nazi attack, "Operation Barbarossa," and the constant *demands by Stalin *that the Allies open another front to draw off the Germans from Russia.
> 
> *The unspoken sentiment is that the Germans would defeat the Soviets*, and that they desperately needed that 'Second Front.'
> 
> What proof of that 'fear' exists? Looking at the great tank battle of Kursk, or a study of Russia's 'three greatest generals, December, January, and February,' certainly don't support same.
> 
> No, the truth is that *FDR's affections for Stalin and Soviet Communism found it useful to claim that without American support.....the end was near for Uncle Joe*
> 
> 
> a. What does history tell us about similar attempts to conquer the Russian bear?
> 
> "Napoleon began his invasion 550 miles from Moscow and 420 miles from St. Petersburg. Hitler began his invasion from a similar distance."Why Russia Is Marching mdash and Eastern Europe Is Afraid - theTrumpet.com
> How did that turn out for the attackers?
> 
> 2. *So....what's all this about a dire need for a "Second Front"....and why did Stalin insist it had to be via the northwestern corner of the continent rather than the south, from Italy and the Adriatic?*
> *
> And why forbid the allies to allow the surrender of Germany, which would have saved countless American lives?
> 
> More to the point....why did Roosevelt go along with this?
> Starting to see the truth about Franklin Delano Roosevelt?*
> 
> 
> 3. * So.....did it really matter where the 'second front' is located?*
> * Stalin was adamant about it forming via the northwestern edge of the continent rather than abide by Churchill's wish, Italy.
> 
> 
> a. Consider the analysis of NYTimes Russia expert, Edwin James:
> " ALLIED FRONT IN ITALY NOT SO FAR FROM REICH; In Other Words, It Is Just as Close to Germany From Any Peninsula Point As It Is From Dnieper THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE"
> By EDWIN L. JAMES
> September 12, 1943
> Pay Articles from September 1943 Part 4 - Site Map - The New York Times
> 
> So....why did Stalin insist on the Allies opening the front at Normandy rather than the bases already conquered in Italy?
> 
> Here's why: he wanted the Red Army to cut Europe in half , as he would be able to occupy same.
> 
> And Roosevelt agreed with him....Roosevelt wanted to give all of Eastern Europe over to this homicidal maniac who slaughtered and oppressed millions!
> 
> 
> 
> b.Don't believe that that was the reason for Stalin's insistence on the "second front" being as far west as possible?
> 
> "Any time or any place where German forces are engaged by the American and the British represents good luck for Stalin. That is true because Hitler's strength is taxed just as much by fighting to the south as it would be fighting to the west."
> Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 266.
> How can one argue with that?*
> *
> 
> Well.....only if "taxing Hitler's strength" wasn't the aim.....gaining the territory of central Europe for the Red Army was.
> 
> 
> 
> c. 'To withdraw from the European continent [Italy] to re-invade the European continent was simply crazy.'
> Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p.195-196
> Yet, Roosevelt sided with Stalin over Churchill, and over General Mark Clark, commander of the 5th US Army, in Italy.
> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> Still care to deny that Stalin was in charge of Roosevelt's war efforts?
> ...and Stalin would get his way down to the last American casualty?
> 
> In the effort to install world-wide communism, any loss to either America, or to Germany, was a gain for Stalin.
> 
> Thank you, Franklin Roosevelt
> 
> 
> 
> Did you know that Eisenhower agreed with Churchill that Italy was the correct attack point.....until he was bought off by George Marshall with a fifth star?*
> 
> *Of course you didn't, you uneducated imbecile.*
Click to expand...

That was a ginormous cutnpaste!!!

Sent from my BN NookHD+ using Tapatalk


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was nothing to bargain
> 
> You were not going to remove the Red Army from territory they fought and died for
> 
> What were you going to offer Stalin to get his troops out of Eastern Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh...not cramming a hydrogen bomb up his ass.
> 
> Not to good at this....are you.
> 
> Neither was FDR.
> 
> The major rollover and cave guy.
Click to expand...


Seriously- are you actually ignorant of history?

When FDR met with Stalin the United States did not have a single functioning atomic bomb- let alone a hydrogen bomb.

When Truman authorized the bombing of Japan- we had two atomic bombs(one was successfully tested)- and bluffed the Japanese into thinking we had more. 

FDR led the United States from the Great Depression to the most complete American victories in our history.

Of course you despise him.


----------



## HenryBHough

It took a truly great president to figure out the best way to end a depression was to kill millions!


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR saved Western Europe
> Stalin conquered Eastern Europe. Nothing short of declaring war on the USSR was going to dislodge them
> 
> To get his part of Europe, FDR lost about 200,000 Americans
> To get his part of Europe, Stalin lost about 20 million Russians
> 
> Looks like FDR got the better part of the deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
Click to expand...


Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.

The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.

FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.



All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.


----------



## Syriusly

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.



What they will not address are what they would have preferred- other than FDR's accomplishments


Leading the United States to victory in WW2
Leading the United States out of the Depression
Creating social security
Creating unemployment insurance.
Creating bank depositer's insurance
Saving American farmers
There is a reason why FDR was overwhelmingly popular- so popular that the GOP became almost irrelevant during that issue- FDR cared about Americans and had vision.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> * So....what, exactly, did Stalin want from American foreign policy? *



Who gives a damn what Stalin wanted?

Why exactly do prefer Hitler over FDR?


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which, in turn is bringing out the Pee Wee Herman in you.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
> ...time for more B-12 shots?
> 
> 1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
> You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.
> 
> 2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
> Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
> And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.
> 
> Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.
> 
> And it will continue so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd rather engage in an intellectual discussion with Stephanie
> 
> She brings more to the table
Click to expand...


You've not engaged in an intellectual discussion since you joined the board from what I've seen.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
Click to expand...


ROTFLMAO

Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.

FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> BTW:
> 
> I don't agree with her half the time.
> 
> On her worse day....she's 100 x the poster you've ever been.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?
> 
> Wanna guess?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I gave up reading your posts years ago
> Not worth the effort.....I'd rather read Stephanie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So you respond to post you don't read?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I speak to the topic of her threads
> What she actually posts does little to support the topic
Click to expand...


At least it's a little...you provide NOTHING to support your assertions.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
Click to expand...


Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Wry Catcher said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR was a great POTUS, in line with Washington, Lincoln, his Cousin TR and Jefferson.
> 
> Ranking Every U.S. President from Worst to First
> 
> See the top 15, Conservatives read and weep.
Click to expand...


What a joke.

Johnston was last.

He stood up against the way the 14th was shoved down the south's throat....and that puts him last ?

Morons.

FDR's new deal was credited with ending the Great Depression......???

By who ?


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROTFLMAO
> 
> Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.
> 
> FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.
Click to expand...


And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?

You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance. 

Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies. 

And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army. 

IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
Click to expand...


Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR was a great POTUS, in line with Washington, Lincoln, his Cousin TR and Jefferson.
> 
> Ranking Every U.S. President from Worst to First
> 
> See the top 15, Conservatives read and weep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a joke.
> 
> Johnston was last.
> 
> He stood up against the way the 14th was shoved down the south's throat....and that puts him last ?
> 
> Morons.
> 
> FDR's new deal was credited with ending the Great Depression......???
> 
> By who ?
Click to expand...


So you are upset about the 14th Amendment too.....not a surprise....


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROTFLMAO
> 
> Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.
> 
> FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?
> 
> You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance.
> 
> Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies.
> 
> And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army.
> 
> IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.
Click to expand...


That is beyond stupid.

Had HItler thrown his full force against he Soviets, he would have created a meat grinder that would have made the USSR meaningless.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years since FDR's death.
> 
> 70 years of conservative attacks, lies, and efforts to impeach FDR's legacy.
> 
> 70 years of rightwing failure, this thread another example of that failure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR was a great POTUS, in line with Washington, Lincoln, his Cousin TR and Jefferson.
> 
> Ranking Every U.S. President from Worst to First
> 
> See the top 15, Conservatives read and weep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a joke.
> 
> Johnston was last.
> 
> He stood up against the way the 14th was shoved down the south's throat....and that puts him last ?
> 
> Morons.
> 
> FDR's new deal was credited with ending the Great Depression......???
> 
> By who ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you are upset about the 14th Amendment too.....not a surprise....
Click to expand...

 
Never said that....talking process.  Or are you really going to claim the 14th was passed without controversy ?


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
Click to expand...


Let's do


Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
Click to expand...


Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.

When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?

What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?

How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?

How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?

Make a much different test.

Best of luck.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, when dealing with Political Chic
> 
> Pee Wee is more than enough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
> ...time for more B-12 shots?
> 
> 1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
> You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.
> 
> 2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
> Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
> And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.
> 
> Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.
> 
> And it will continue so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd rather engage in an intellectual discussion with Stephanie
> 
> She brings more to the table
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've not engaged in an intellectual discussion since you joined the board from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

Save it


----------



## Wry Catcher

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROTFLMAO
> 
> Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.
> 
> FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?
> 
> You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance.
> 
> Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies.
> 
> And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army.
> 
> IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is beyond stupid.
> 
> Had HItler thrown his full force against he Soviets, he would have created a meat grinder that would have made the USSR meaningless.
Click to expand...


_The Battle of Stalingrad (July 17, 1942-Feb. 2, 1943), was the successful Soviet defense of the city of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) in the U.S.S.R. during World War II. Russians consider it to be the greatest battle of their Great Patriotic War, and most historians consider it to be the greatest battle of the entire conflict. It stopped the German advance into the Soviet Union and marked the turning of the tide of war in favor of the Allies. The Battle of Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest battles in history, with combined military and civilian casualties of nearly 2 million._
_Battle of Stalingrad - World War II - HISTORY.com

_


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.
> 
> You are pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually find Ann Coulter amusing.  She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining
> 
> Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
> ...time for more B-12 shots?
> 
> 1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
> You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.
> 
> 2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
> Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
> And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.
> 
> Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.
> 
> And it will continue so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd rather engage in an intellectual discussion with Stephanie
> 
> She brings more to the table
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've not engaged in an intellectual discussion since you joined the board from what I've seen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Save it
Click to expand...


Butthurt much ?

You and your daisy chain couldn't take on PC if she was in a coma.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe.  He was invaded.
> 
> Please don't be such a liar.
> 
> You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent.  Which he was.
> 
> FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.
> 
> I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.
> 
> Can you be any more stupid ?
> 
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
> The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.
> 
> No threats...no nothing.
> 
> Rolled over and caved.
> 
> Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.
> 
> Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.
> 
> The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.
> 
> FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.
> 
> What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?
> 
> And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
Click to expand...




" a German victory-"


This can only lead to one conclusion about you: "you are displaying sheer ignorance."

Here are the facts:

It was Stalin who was providing the resources that fueled the German armed forces.


.. when Operation Barbarossa started on June 22, 1941,*the available (German) supplies of fuel, tires, spare parts etc., were only good enough for about two months.....*

Stalin, in fact, had been supplying resources to Hitler.

"The Wehrmacht continued to advance, albeit*very slowly, and by mid-November *some units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But the *troops were now totally exhausted, and running out of supplies. Their commanders knew that it was simply impossible to take Moscow."*
Hitler s Failed Blitzkrieg against the Soviet Union. The Battle of Moscow and Stalingrad Turning Point of World War II Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization
72 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II
'The Victory of the Red Army in front of Moscow was a Major Break'…
by Jacques Pauwels



By attacking in June, *Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
*
He didn't.

There was never a chance that Hitler would have beaten Stalin.

a.*Stalin would not only not have surrendered, he would have defeated Hitler!*

b.*He used Roosevelt *to make sure that there would be no German resistance to communism in Europe post war,

c. He forced Roosevelt to *refuse to accept German surrender,*or armistice, extending the war by several years, and costing hundreds of thousands of American lives.



You're simply a fool.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Wry Catcher said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.
> 
> And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR.  We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.
> 
> And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?
> 
> Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.
> 
> Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROTFLMAO
> 
> Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.
> 
> FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?
> 
> You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance.
> 
> Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies.
> 
> And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army.
> 
> IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is beyond stupid.
> 
> Had HItler thrown his full force against he Soviets, he would have created a meat grinder that would have made the USSR meaningless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The Battle of Stalingrad (July 17, 1942-Feb. 2, 1943), was the successful Soviet defense of the city of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) in the U.S.S.R. during World War II. Russians consider it to be the greatest battle of their Great Patriotic War, and most historians consider it to be the greatest battle of the entire conflict. It stopped the German advance into the Soviet Union and marked the turning of the tide of war in favor of the Allies. The Battle of Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest battles in history, with combined military and civilian casualties of nearly 2 million.
> Battle of Stalingrad - World War II - HISTORY.com
> _
Click to expand...


Thanks for making my point.  Had Hitler thrown his full force against the USSR he would have hurt them worse.

He was never going to take over the USSR...that was not possible.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> * So....what, exactly, did Stalin want from American foreign policy? *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who gives a damn what Stalin wanted?
> 
> Why exactly do prefer Hitler over FDR?
Click to expand...



Why do you lie?

Oh...because you've been eviscerated in the discussion.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
Click to expand...

FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk

Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too
> 
> If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?
> 
> Wanna guess?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I gave up reading your posts years ago
> Not worth the effort.....I'd rather read Stephanie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So you respond to post you don't read?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I speak to the topic of her threads
> What she actually posts does little to support the topic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At least it's a little...you provide NOTHING to support your assertions.
Click to expand...




It's, another of those perqs from being a Liberal:

1. You never have to apologize for your bad judgment.....e.g., the Obama presidency

2. You never have to account for the facts, those pesky things that prove how totally, abysmally, eternally wrong you are.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
Click to expand...



"Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."


Liar.


 "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*

What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."* 
West, "American Betrayal," p.266



Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!


----------



## Searcher44

Is this fair? The title and some of the contents of the OP invites comparison of the two Presidents in perhaps the most important role performed by any president, as defined by Article ll, Section ll of the U.S. Constitution "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States."
In FDRs case we are left with mountains of evidence, news reel footage, thousands of books etc. that help us assess the performance of his duties as C.I.C. on two fronts against mightily armed rivals intent on the destruction of America. These two  rivals had basically taken advantage of America's flirtation with isolationism to amass the most formidable war machines the World had ever seen. FDR's root challenge was to take a peacetime nation and turn it into an weapons producing giant in a very short time. The fact that America came to be known as "The Arsenal of Democracy" is testament to the success of that undertaking. One example might be illustrative and enlightening. British and Allied shipping was being decimated by German U boats at the beginning of the War and trans-Atlantic supplies were the life blood of Britain's resistance to the Nazis, something had to be done.  America had to build ships faster than the Germans could sink them. Roosevelt ordered an Emergency Shipping Program (which he monitored closely throughout the war), to counter the threat of the War effort being choked off. This is a long and complicated story and beautifully demonstrates Roosevelt's  genius in picking the right people to accomplish near impossible tasks but I will keep it short.  "Liberty Ships" were the workhorse of lend lease convoys.  (Roosevelt called these ships "dreadful looking things", hence their nickname "Ugly Ducklings") At the beginning of 1942 these cargo ships were taking 240 days from keel lay down to launch. By the end of 1942 the time was cut to 56 days. By the end of the War one builder had completed a ship in less than 5 days. And I think I recall a source which said at the end of the War "Emergency" cargo ships were produced at the rate of one per day taking into account all the different yards that were in the effort, but I can't lay my hands on that piece of data, anybody? Roosevelt's plan had succeeded beyond anyone's wildest hope.
This demonstration of Roosevelt's capabilities as Commander-in-Chief was probably repeated at least thousand times during different aspects of WWll. 

Can you see why I asked if it was fair of  PoliticalChic to leave the door open for comparison between Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Ronald Wilson Reagan as War-time Commander-in-Chiefs?  What conflict can we use to compare Reagan's Commander-in-Chief successes or failures? Unfortunately history leaves us only one - Operation Urgent Fury, the 1983 invasion of Grenada, a country whose population at that time might have filled a large football stadium. The operation was begun on Oct. 25 by about a 7600 mixed force assault. This being the first major operation since Vietnam all branches of the military wanted in on it and this led to one of the continuing problems of the action, communication between different parts of the force was difficult and without some luck could have been the cause of tragedy. One tragedy that was averted just in time was the shelling of "Ft. Adolphus" which was thought to be a Cuban stronghold. Luckily the shelling was called off, the fort turned out to be the Venezuelan Embassy. The General who ordered the shelling had not recognized the flag. This brings up another problem with the invasion, intelligence was poor and the troops had bad, or no maps at all. You'd think that wouldn't be a problem for a tourist destination like Grenada. The American forces faced stiffer defense than anticipated from the 1500 Grenada guard and 700 Cubans (the number of these Cubans who were combat personnel has been estimated at 100 to the full 700) On the evening of Oct. 26 two battalions of reinforcements had to be called in. Of course the assault was fairly quickly a success, after 3 days and with few American casualties. As I said though but for some luck things could have been worse. Poor intelligence had led  to a group of helicopters being ordered into an area heavily defended by anti-aircraft. A Marine report commented on.... "a shortage of usable maps and "an almost total lack of information concerning suitable beaches and helicopter landing zones on Grenada."  The Marines ended up relying in part on the memory of an officer who had vacationed on the island and who was in the assault force by chance. A troops mission to seize a prison was stymied by a NYT's reporter who had released the prisoners.

Margaret Thatcher, Reagan's great ally, had this to say at 12:30 A.M. on Oct.25;

_"This action will be seen as intervention by a Western country in the internal affairs of a small independent nation, however unattractive its regime. I ask you to consider this in the context of our wider East/West relations and of the fact that we will be having in the next few days to present to our Parliament and people the siting of Cruise missiles in this country. I must ask you to think most carefully about these points. I cannot conceal that I am deeply disturbed by your latest communication. You asked for my advice. I have set it out and hope that even at this late stage you will take it into account before events are irrevocable_"

The above mentioned Marine report, and an earlier analysis prepared for the joint Chiefs of Staff by Adm. Wesley L. McDonald, the invasion commander, support some of the charges made by military critics of the operation--that the landings were hastily planned, supported by inadequate intelligence, and complicated by glitches in coordinating units from the four military services."

And so this little war turned out to be a "success," but even without bringing up the questionable justifications put forward for "regime change" in this case I'm not sure Ronald Reagan as Commander-in-Chief would have worn this action as a badge of honor. Even though there were 5000 medals handed out for merit and valor in this little dust-up.

Sources - Wikipedia
Grenada Invasion Plagued by Mistakes, 2 Reports Say
US Invasion of Grenada: A 30-Year Retrospective
Invasion of Grenada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## regent

I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.




Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
Click to expand...

Explain why this claim about the USSR did not occupy those areas quoted by conspiracy theorist West is not a lie.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
Click to expand...


We were in no position to dislodge them

We got the West...they got the east

They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part


----------



## Wry Catcher

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
Click to expand...


Which fallacy do you claim?


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?


Was FDR the first to recognize the USSR or had other nations such as Britain, Italy, Germany and others recognized the USSR much earlier? Was America late in its recognition?


----------



## Unkotare

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which fallacy do you claim?
Click to expand...








Appeal to authority, for one.


----------



## regent

This 2010 poll was taken by Siena college that polled 238 of America's best historians and presidential experts.  The presidential polling has taken place since 1948 with over a thousand of America's most noted historians.


----------



## Wry Catcher

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which fallacy do you claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appeal to authority, for one.
Click to expand...


That doesn't wash, the authority are a number of Ph.D historians, real authorities, unlike the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck.


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.
> 
> Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.
> 
> By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He nailed you, didn't he.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not getting nailed, lately PC? Lighten up on the bon bons. Put a little time in the gym. Maybe you can get hubby back from the massage parlors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And so the only kind of post Leftists are capable of....
> 
> ...after you've been revealed as an ignorant, dishonest, acolyte of the Left.
> 
> 
> It's the Liberals version of licking your wounds.
Click to expand...


Says the conservative that started with the personal insults.

Irony is a dish best served to PC. Who doesn't get it anyways.

There's wood..and it's less intelligent cousin, PoliticalChic.


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
> 
> Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
> Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
> Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
> Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business
> 
> Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.
> 
> FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.
> 
> And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency  to 9% in 1941.
> 
> And you are still pissed off about that.
> 
> You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.
> 
> "FDR prepared the United States for war,..."
> 
> Of course he did no such thing.
> 
> FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
> Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet another lie.
> 
> 
> Clean that boot-black off your tongue.
Click to expand...


You carry water for this guy:


Nuff. Said.

You've been served.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
Click to expand...


----------



## Dot Com

how many criminal convictions were there in the Gipper's Admin?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
Click to expand...


No- just your usual obsessive anti-FDR crap.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.
> 
> The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.
> 
> FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROTFLMAO
> 
> Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.
> 
> FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?
> 
> You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance.
> 
> Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies.
> 
> And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army.
> 
> IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is beyond stupid.
> 
> Had HItler thrown his full force against he Soviets, he would have created a meat grinder that would have made the USSR meaningless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The Battle of Stalingrad (July 17, 1942-Feb. 2, 1943), was the successful Soviet defense of the city of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) in the U.S.S.R. during World War II. Russians consider it to be the greatest battle of their Great Patriotic War, and most historians consider it to be the greatest battle of the entire conflict. It stopped the German advance into the Soviet Union and marked the turning of the tide of war in favor of the Allies. The Battle of Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest battles in history, with combined military and civilian casualties of nearly 2 million.
> Battle of Stalingrad - World War II - HISTORY.com
> _
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks for making my point.  Had Hitler thrown his full force against the USSR he would have hurt them worse.
> 
> He was never going to take over the USSR...that was not possible.
Click to expand...


Stalin thought otherwise.

Stalin credited American lend- lease with preventing the Soviet defeat by the Germans.

But I understand you prefer that Hitler stayed in power for additional years. 

What would have been the end result of Hitler staying in power in Western Europe?

The complete extermination of Jews in Europe.

Is that perhaps what you are most upset about?


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
Click to expand...


I notice you couldn't even answer the questions- you don't even know when the first atomic bomb went off.

You don't know when the first hydrogen bomb was set off- yet your answer was FDR should have bombed Moscow with a hydrogen bomb.

FDR was not alive when the first atomic bomb was tested- July 16, 1945.
Because FDR had died April 12, 1945.

Everyone hoped that atomic bomb would work- but didn't know if it would- and no one believed how powerful they would be- even the physicists under estimated the atomic bombs.

So- tell me how many American GI's do you think should have been sacrificed to save Eastern Europe from Stalin?
Would you have preferred HItler remain in power instead of Stalin?


----------



## Dot Com

Has this Sun Devil rw'er provided any sourcing in this thread? ANY?!!! He's like an OldStyle clone


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.





"I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians blah blah blah....."

And I have noted that said post is a priori evidence of a brain-numbed  boot-licker searching for a way to dodge the facts presented.


Clearly you have no ability accept the truth.
On the bright side...you are the poster child for government schooling.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
Click to expand...




Your post is false in every single element.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> Was FDR the first to recognize the USSR or had other nations such as Britain, Italy, Germany and others recognized the USSR much earlier? Was America late in its recognition?
Click to expand...





"Was FDR the first to recognize the USSR or had other nations..."


1. . FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. On November 16, 1933, President Roosevelt rushed to embrace....recognize...the USSR. If this act, based on FDR's additional pro-Soviet endeavors, was rational....then these folks must have been irrational:

"Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half held to this resolve," i.e., refusal to recognize the Soviet government. That was written by Herbert Hoover, one of those four Presidents. He wrote it in his "Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath"by George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011, pg 24-29.


2. What other nations did is not a consideration.
Or...are you one with John Kerry who demanded that United States foreign policy be left to the consensus of other nations.
Know how the American public reacted to that?

Check with your 'historians,' the amanuenses who tell you what to think, and they'll tell you that I am correct.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> This 2010 poll was taken by Siena college that polled 238 of America's best historians and presidential experts.  The presidential polling has taken place since 1948 with over a thousand of America's most noted historians.





In that case, why are you unable to dispute any of the facts that I provide?


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
Click to expand...

 
Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste


----------



## PoliticalChic

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which fallacy do you claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appeal to authority, for one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't wash, the authority are a number of Ph.D historians, real authorities, unlike the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck.
Click to expand...




In a firmament of outrageously stupid, inane, false posts that you have provided....this one may be the queen of all.


This:
"....the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck."


Almost every university, publishing house, media outlet is a wholly owned subsidiary of Liberalism, Inc.

Yet you claim that providing facts not in accordance with the Liberal view is how one 'makes a buck.'

What a moron you are.
But, you must tire of everyone telling you that.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's do
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
Click to expand...




Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'

As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_


a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]

These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
Military History Online


Patton was correct.
Roosevelt not.

Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'



You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's do
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
Click to expand...


They didn't pay a price to get the east.  

They paid the price defending their homeland.

With the Germans beaten and the Allied forces closing in on the West, the Russians had a pretty easy time getting to Berlin.

They then just decided to stay.

If they had not had their eyes on Eastern Europe, they would have still paid a heavy price in blood.

Your false associations only support the general assertion on the board that you are nothing but a hack far left brownshirt propaganda spreader.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
Click to expand...

The OP is following her usual pattern. She ignores specific challenges and moves on to new cut and pastes theories to deflect from the lies she has already been caught in. Most of her cut and paste has been debunked in the past in numerous other anti-FDR conspiracy threads. This one is no exception.
Patton was not concerning himself with the unfinished war with Japan. Military planners were preparing to use the US forces from Europe to defeat Japan. Russian forces were planned for defeating the Japanese occupying China and Korea. Patton wanted to continue the war in Europe, even to the level of rearming the Germans, forcing battles onto already devastaed areas of Eastern Europe and forcing a whole new era of American consriptions to fight the Japaneses while the American troops who survivied the war in Euruope were used up in a new campaign against Russia.


----------



## Camp

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
Click to expand...

With that statement you have lost any and all credibility as a student of WWII history.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Camp said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With that statement you have lost any and all credibility as a student of WWII history.
Click to expand...


Coming from you....I'm crushed.......GFY.

If you think no Russians died in defense of their homeland.......knock yourself out.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With that statement you have lost any and all credibility as a student of WWII history.
Click to expand...



The concept of irony has spent the entirety of its existence waiting for you to come along and give it meaning.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
Click to expand...

 
Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen

The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.


----------



## rightwinger

Sun Devil 92 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> They paid the price defending their homeland.
> 
> With the Germans beaten and the Allied forces closing in on the West, the Russians had a pretty easy time getting to Berlin.
> 
> They then just decided to stay.
> 
> If they had not had their eyes on Eastern Europe, they would have still paid a heavy price in blood.
> 
> Your false associations only support the general assertion on the board that you are nothing but a hack far left brownshirt propaganda spreader.
Click to expand...

 
The Soviets paid a horrific price ...20 million dead
When you are invaded and driven almost to the breaking point and fight to save yourself...you come out with one goal...NEVER AGAIN

Never again meant the Soviets would build a security buffer and ensure that no miltary force could get as close to their border. FDR was in no position to convince them otherwise


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
Click to expand...




From you:
"Patton was a moron."


From the NYTimes:
"Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
Patton's Career A Brilliant One



And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> They paid the price defending their homeland.
> 
> With the Germans beaten and the Allied forces closing in on the West, the Russians had a pretty easy time getting to Berlin.
> 
> They then just decided to stay.
> 
> If they had not had their eyes on Eastern Europe, they would have still paid a heavy price in blood.
> 
> Your false associations only support the general assertion on the board that you are nothing but a hack far left brownshirt propaganda spreader.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Soviets paid a horrific price ...20 million dead
> When you are invaded and driven almost to the breaking point and fight to save yourself...you come out with one goal...NEVER AGAIN
> 
> Never again meant the Soviets would build a security buffer and ensure that no miltary force could get as close to their border. FDR was in no position to convince them otherwise
Click to expand...



The 20 million...and more....were killed by the Soviet homicidal maniacs whose control of Russia was made possible through the tireless efforts of one Franklin Roosevelt, your lord and master.

Trying to educate you is like trying to grip smoke.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
Click to expand...

 
Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...

_Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_

Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> They paid the price defending their homeland.
> 
> With the Germans beaten and the Allied forces closing in on the West, the Russians had a pretty easy time getting to Berlin.
> 
> They then just decided to stay.
> 
> If they had not had their eyes on Eastern Europe, they would have still paid a heavy price in blood.
> 
> Your false associations only support the general assertion on the board that you are nothing but a hack far left brownshirt propaganda spreader.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Soviets paid a horrific price ...20 million dead
> When you are invaded and driven almost to the breaking point and fight to save yourself...you come out with one goal...NEVER AGAIN
> 
> Never again meant the Soviets would build a security buffer and ensure that no miltary force could get as close to their border. FDR was in no position to convince them otherwise
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The 20 million...and more....were killed by the Soviet homicidal maniacs whose control of Russia was made possible through the tireless efforts of one Franklin Roosevelt, your lord and master.
> 
> Trying to educate you is like trying to grip smoke.
Click to expand...

 
I'll just chalk that one up to more trolling on your part
I'm not going to take the bait


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> 
> 
> Was FDR the first to recognize the USSR or had other nations such as Britain, Italy, Germany and others recognized the USSR much earlier? Was America late in its recognition?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Was FDR the first to recognize the USSR or had other nations..."
> 
> 
> 1. . FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. On November 16, 1933, President Roosevelt rushed to embrace....recognize...the USSR. If this act, based on FDR's additional pro-Soviet endeavors, was rational....then these folks must have been irrational:
> .
Click to expand...


Note once again- you refuse to actually respond to a question. FDR recognized the Soviet Union- just as Nixon would later recognize Communist China.

Both recognized political realities. 

In 1945, under FDR's leadership- the United States had the most powerful economy- and the most powerful military in the world- all achieved during FDR's presidency. 

Clearly that offends Politicalchic and his fanboys.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which fallacy do you claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appeal to authority, for one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't wash, the authority are a number of Ph.D historians, real authorities, unlike the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In a firmament of outrageously stupid, inane, false posts that you have provided....this one may be the queen of all.
> 
> 
> This:
> "....the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck."
> 
> 
> Almost every university, publishing house, media outlet is a wholly owned subsidiary of Liberalism, Inc.
> 
> Yet you claim that providing facts not in accordance with the Liberal view is how one 'makes a buck.'
> 
> What a moron you are.
> But, you must tire of everyone telling you that.
Click to expand...


There is no 'there' in your post.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> They paid the price defending their homeland.
> 
> With the Germans beaten and the Allied forces closing in on the West, the Russians had a pretty easy time getting to Berlin.
> 
> They then just decided to stay.
> 
> If they had not had their eyes on Eastern Europe, they would have still paid a heavy price in blood.
> 
> Your false associations only support the general assertion on the board that you are nothing but a hack far left brownshirt propaganda spreader.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Soviets paid a horrific price ...20 million dead
> When you are invaded and driven almost to the breaking point and fight to save yourself...you come out with one goal...NEVER AGAIN
> 
> Never again meant the Soviets would build a security buffer and ensure that no miltary force could get as close to their border. FDR was in no position to convince them otherwise
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The 20 million...and more....were killed by the Soviet homicidal maniacs whose control of Russia was made possible through the tireless efforts of one Franklin Roosevelt, your lord and master.
> 
> Trying to educate you is like trying to grip smoke.
Click to expand...


You are a complete loon.


The Soviets had had control of Russia for a decade before FDR was elected.
Germans killed those 20 million- not Soviets
Unless you are at least 70 plus years old, you didn't even live while FDR was alive- and would have had to be at least 21 to have been of voting age while FDR was alive- so FDR is no one's "Lord and Master"
FDR however was immensely popular with Americans- one of the most popular Presidents in American history.
When FDR was elected the United States was in a deep Depression, and was a third rate- distant third rate military power. Unemployment was the highest in American history, farmers were being driven off of their farms, and hunger and malnutrition was a real problem in America.

When FDR died, the United State's had the strongest economy in the world, and we had the most powerful military in the world. Unemployment had almost vanished, farmers were making money, and people were well fed.

No wonder you despise FDR.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
Click to expand...




What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?

Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?

Which is it?


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They didn't pay a price to get the east.
> 
> They paid the price defending their homeland.
> 
> With the Germans beaten and the Allied forces closing in on the West, the Russians had a pretty easy time getting to Berlin.
> 
> They then just decided to stay.
> 
> If they had not had their eyes on Eastern Europe, they would have still paid a heavy price in blood.
> 
> Your false associations only support the general assertion on the board that you are nothing but a hack far left brownshirt propaganda spreader.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Soviets paid a horrific price ...20 million dead
> When you are invaded and driven almost to the breaking point and fight to save yourself...you come out with one goal...NEVER AGAIN
> 
> Never again meant the Soviets would build a security buffer and ensure that no miltary force could get as close to their border. FDR was in no position to convince them otherwise
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The 20 million...and more....were killed by the Soviet homicidal maniacs whose control of Russia was made possible through the tireless efforts of one Franklin Roosevelt, your lord and master.
> 
> Trying to educate you is like trying to grip smoke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll just chalk that one up to more trolling on your part
> I'm not going to take the bait
Click to expand...



'education' characterized as 'bait'?

Really?


I want you to know that I reprimanded other posters for mimicking you. I tell them not to act like a fool.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
Click to expand...

 
It is academic lazyness on your part

Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable

Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
Click to expand...




I asked:

What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?

Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?

Which is it?


So....based on your response....it is the former?

The profanity is a give-away.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
Click to expand...


And like all obituaries- that was very flattering.

Patton was brilliant in many ways, militarily-a great combat leader-  but as many biographers have noted he also had serious flaws. There is a reason why Eisenhower and Bradley reined him in- they recognized his talents- probably more than any other American general he understood mobile warfare. 

That doesn't mean he was a great strategic leader- or a great grasp of the entire war.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> .
Click to expand...


I have two problems with your 'cut and paste'

1) What you do cut and paste is your own crap and
2) Cutting and pasting enables your habit of posting vast quantities of crap.

You are unable to write a succinct and comprehensible opinion.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
Click to expand...

Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command. 
You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
Click to expand...

 
No.."fucking lazy" best defines your posting abilities

It results in endless, droll information which does little to define your point of view. In fact, it highlights that you have little personal insight to add to your own threads and substitute endless cut and paste.


----------



## Syriusly

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
Click to expand...


FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready. 

I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber. 

Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible. 

PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.


----------



## Sallow

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We were in no position to dislodge them
> 
> We got the West...they got the east
> 
> They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is false in every single element.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
Click to expand...


Patton was correct about what? Starting a war with one of our allies? After they did most of the fighting in Europe?

That's rich.


----------



## Samson

rightwinger said:


> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste



You realize we've been saying this for years.


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
Click to expand...

your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.


----------



## Samson

Dot Com said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
Click to expand...


You waited until page 36 to say it?


----------



## Unkotare

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which fallacy do you claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appeal to authority, for one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't wash, the authority are a number of Ph.D historians, real authorities, unlike the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck.
Click to expand...



You misunderstand the fallacy in application.


----------



## Unkotare

Dot Com said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
Click to expand...



Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.


----------



## Camp

Unkotare said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
Click to expand...

You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.


----------



## Unkotare

Camp said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
Click to expand...



Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?


----------



## Wry Catcher

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and  have never rated FDR below third best American president.
> Perhaps  PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which fallacy do you claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Appeal to authority, for one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't wash, the authority are a number of Ph.D historians, real authorities, unlike the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You misunderstand the fallacy in application.
Click to expand...


Your logical fallacy is appeal to authority

I did not, here is proof unless you believe this too is an appeal to authority.


----------



## Dot Com

@OP 

Reagan administration scandals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> The presidency of Ronald Reagan in the United States was marked by multiple scandals, resulting in the investigation, indictment, or conviction of over 138 administration officials, the largest number for any US president.[1]


----------



## regent

Dot Com said:


> @OP
> 
> Reagan administration scandals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> The presidency of Ronald Reagan in the United States was marked by multiple scandals, resulting in the investigation, indictment, or conviction of over 138 administration officials, the largest number for any US president.[1]
Click to expand...

Add to that Reagan voted for FDR.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ripping one as ignorant as you are is the proverbial 'fish in a barrel.'
> 
> As with Prague,*Patton’s request to secure Berlin was denied.*Sadly, after Patton finally reached the ravaged city, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945,_” for the first week after they took it (Berlin),*all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped.*
> I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”_
> 
> 
> a. "Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think?*We are going to have to fight them sooner or later,*within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end* kicked back to Russia in three months? *We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
> 
> These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
> Military History Online
> 
> 
> Patton was correct.
> Roosevelt not.
> 
> Roosevelt had reasons for behavior....his affection for  'Uncle Joe.'
> 
> 
> 
> You, on the other hand, have no ability to reason....simply to follow orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
Click to expand...


liar


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Samson said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen was nowhere close to his military accumen
> 
> The rightwing fantasy of Patton seizing most of Europe is just that...fantasy
> The political realities were that the USSR fought and died for most of Eastern Europe while we were waiting three years to invade Normandy. We were spared tens of thousands of casualties because the Soviets were engaging the top Nazi divisions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From you:
> "Patton was a moron."
> 
> 
> From the NYTimes:
> "Gen. George Smith Patton Jr. was one of the most brilliant soldiers in American history. Audacious, unorthodox and inspiring, he led his troops to great victories in North Africa, Sicily and on the Western Front. Nazi generals admitted that of all American field commanders he was the one they most feared. To Americans he was a worthy successor of such hardbitten cavalrymen as Philip Sheridan, J. E. B. Stuart and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
> Patton's Career A Brilliant One
> 
> 
> 
> And so we see one more in a long line of posts where your inability comes to bite you in your thinking apparatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You waited until page 36 to say it?
Click to expand...


So, why is it that when RW or Dot Com or CrusaderFrank post threads....they get a maybe 40 replies whereas PC's generally range in the 500+ number ?

Because the far left does not read them.

I don't agree with her on several points, but I appreciate someone who can back up their posts.

With RW what you get is nothing but stupid pontification about the way things were just because she said so.


----------



## regent

PC makes some absurd charges and uses questionable sources for backup. The charges can be so ridiculous that some people probably  respond to set the record straight and then comes more of the same from Chic, plus a little name calling and insults. Simple game of "I gotcha."  
When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists. Her evidence for historians being communists was that historians voted highly for FDR. How does one respond to that type of reasoning. I read some of her posts, now with amusement but certainly not seriously, but as the sham they are.


----------



## rightwinger

regent said:


> PC makes some absurd charges and uses questionable sources for backup. The charges can be so ridiculous that some people probably  respond to set the record straight and then comes more of the same from Chic, plus a little name calling and insults. Simple game of "I gotcha."
> When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists. Her evidence for historians being communists was that historians voted highly for FDR. How does one respond to that type of reasoning. I read some of her posts, now with amusement but certainly not seriously, but as the sham they are.


PC is playing a game where she channels Ann Coulter

The game is....watch me piss off the liberals
She makes bizarre claims, then giggles as liberals refute her.....she responds with unrelated cut and pastes ...Rinse and Repeat

For some reason, she gets a chuckle out of it....watch for more tomorrow


----------



## Sun Devil 92

rightwinger said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC makes some absurd charges and uses questionable sources for backup. The charges can be so ridiculous that some people probably  respond to set the record straight and then comes more of the same from Chic, plus a little name calling and insults. Simple game of "I gotcha."
> When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists. Her evidence for historians being communists was that historians voted highly for FDR. How does one respond to that type of reasoning. I read some of her posts, now with amusement but certainly not seriously, but as the sham they are.
> 
> 
> 
> PC is playing a game where she channels Ann Coulter
> 
> The game is....watch me piss off the liberals
> She makes bizarre claims, then giggles as liberals refute her.....she responds with unrelated cut and pastes ...Rinse and Repeat
> 
> For some reason, she gets a chuckle out of it....watch for more tomorrow
Click to expand...


Liberals refute her ?

You are not a liberal....not by a long shot.


----------



## Dot Com

regent said:


> Add to that Reagan voted for FDR.


PoliticalChic


----------



## Dot Com

regent said:


> PC makes some absurd charges and uses questionable sources for backup. The charges can be so ridiculous that some people probably  respond to set the record straight and then comes more of the same from Chic, plus a little name calling and insults. Simple game of "I gotcha."
> When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists. Her evidence for historians being communists was that historians voted highly for FDR. How does one respond to that type of reasoning. I read some of her posts, now with amusement but certainly not seriously, but as the sham they are.


We just humor the rw wingnut by letting her think we care about her Day Room  scrivenings


----------



## PoliticalChic

Unkotare said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
Click to expand...




I hope you'll add the fact that his anti-black sentiments resulted in appointing KKKer Hugo Black as his very first Supreme Court Justice.


He has an unbroken record of anti-black, anti-Jew, anti-Asian actions.....yet he receives genuflection from the Liberals.


----------



## PoliticalChic

This thread....as is true of so very many others, reveals the inability and low nature of the defenders of myth and totalitarian governance on the Left.....
...versus the-truth tellers of the Right.



The pantheon of posts from the Leftists are 'is not,is not,' without any support for the denials...

....outright lies about imagined success of their demigods,....

....ignoring the malevolence and misbehavior of their lords and masters,,,,

,,,charges that any who reveal the truth are fascists and Nazis......

...and a multitude of attacks on your poor reporter....moi.




As this thread has become quite long.....it behooves me to remind of some of the truths it provided and the Roosevelt lap-dogs were unable to refute...



So it will be done in the next several posts.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> This thread....as is true of so very many others, reveals the inability and low nature of the defenders of myth and totalitarian governance on the Left.....
> ...versus the-truth tellers of the Right.
> 
> 
> 
> The pantheon of posts from the Leftists are 'is not,is not,' without any support for the denials...
> 
> ....outright lies about imagined success of their demigods,....
> 
> ....ignoring the malevolence and misbehavior of their lords and masters,,,,
> 
> ,,,charges that any who reveal the truth are fascists and Nazis......
> 
> ...and a multitude of attacks on your poor reporter....moi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As this thread has become quite long.....it behooves me to remind of some of the truths it provided and the Roosevelt lap-dogs were unable to refute...
> 
> 
> 
> So it will be done in the next several posts.


Your lies have indeed been refuted. It is the reason your thread is so long. You keep ignoring the beating you get as your assertions are debunked. Your method of prolonging the thread is simply to not answer challenges and move on to new lies and misrepresentations. 
For a reminder, I challenged your lie about FDR not preparing the military for WWII with links to the modern weapons he had developed quietly as he prepared industry to transform into war production. One of the things celebrated about FDR is the way he did in fact, prepare the US military for WWII. You take a distorted single quote to promote your lie. I provided numerous links to debunk that lie.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
Click to expand...




Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.

"FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."

Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.

He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.

He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.


He failed at the war as he did at solving the Depression, both of which he extended by years with the commensurate casualties each caused.




Now here is the pattern: I will destroy this statement with facts and quotes....and the dolt who wrote it will provide the oh-so-insightful 'sez you!!!'

Watch:
"....preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."

1. “Though FDR is treated in many histories as a far-seeing statesman waging a great crusade for freedom, the record provided by the Folsoms, backed by their extensive researches, shows us something different.* In lack of preparedness during the run-up to the war (while contriving to get us into it), thereafter in many phases of its conduct, and most of all in the end game played out with the Soviet dictator Stalin at Teheran and Yalta, Roosevelt made countless tragic blunders, …* In particular, by various wartime stratagems he pursued and postwar policies he favored, he materially increased the strength of the Soviet Union and so helped consign untold numbers of suffering victims to its despotic rule.”              M. Stanton Evans


2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war.
a.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
b.  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.

3. Why prepare?
Due to cuts in military spending through the 30’s as a percentage of the federal budget, the United States was woefully unprepared for war. The US was 17th in the world in military strength, and this ultimately let us into a two-ocean war.


4. The more astute knew what was coming.

a. Admiral Richardson pleaded with the President to move the Pearl Harbor fleet to the mainland…but he not only would not listen… “Prior to the attack, Admiral Richardson was stripped of his command of Pearl Harbor by FDR, for warning of the fleet's vulnerability.”                                               http://www.thehiddenevil.com/pearl.asp

b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.




Now watch this imbecile's response to that unassailable argument....propbably the same one he keeps trying: "you....you....you Nazi, you!!!!"


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread....as is true of so very many others, reveals the inability and low nature of the defenders of myth and totalitarian governance on the Left.....
> ...versus the-truth tellers of the Right.
> 
> 
> 
> The pantheon of posts from the Leftists are 'is not,is not,' without any support for the denials...
> 
> ....outright lies about imagined success of their demigods,....
> 
> ....ignoring the malevolence and misbehavior of their lords and masters,,,,
> 
> ,,,charges that any who reveal the truth are fascists and Nazis......
> 
> ...and a multitude of attacks on your poor reporter....moi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As this thread has become quite long.....it behooves me to remind of some of the truths it provided and the Roosevelt lap-dogs were unable to refute...
> 
> 
> 
> So it will be done in the next several posts.
> 
> 
> 
> Your lies have indeed been refuted. It is the reason your thread is so long. You keep ignoring the beating you get as your assertions are debunked. Your method of prolonging the thread is simply to not answer challenges and move on to new lies and misrepresentations.
> For a reminder, I challenged your lie about FDR not preparing the military for WWII with links to the modern weapons he had developed quietly as he prepared industry to transform into war production. One of the things celebrated about FDR is the way he did in fact, prepare the US military for WWII. You take a distorted single quote to promote your lie. I provided numerous links to debunk that lie.
Click to expand...



Try post #378 on for size, you lying gutter snipe.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PC makes some absurd charges and uses questionable sources for backup. The charges can be so ridiculous that some people probably  respond to set the record straight and then comes more of the same from Chic, plus a little name calling and insults. Simple game of "I gotcha."
> When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists. Her evidence for historians being communists was that historians voted highly for FDR. How does one respond to that type of reasoning. I read some of her posts, now with amusement but certainly not seriously, but as the sham they are.





"When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists."

My response was that the 'historians' you allow to do your thinking for you are no more than amanuenses 

Definition: a person employed to write what another dictates or to copy what has been written by another; secretary.


That's the meaning, and the fact.
They are academics whose income and status is determined by Liberalism, Inc.


But the truth is seeping out......


'Scholars have discovered that totalitarian philosophies have a social-egalitarian component that adds to the mass popularity of such regimes. Thus, not only National Socialism, with its belief that its racial doctrine entailed the promise of equality for all members of the German people, or ‘Volk,’ but if one can look beyond the repression and terror, the New Deal can be seen as a series of economic misadventures achieved through the force of mass propaganda, and owing its success solely to America’s victory in WWII.'   Wolfgang Schivelbusch                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
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.


Now.....aren't you embarrassed that you are too fearful to actually think for yourself?


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC makes some absurd charges and uses questionable sources for backup. The charges can be so ridiculous that some people probably  respond to set the record straight and then comes more of the same from Chic, plus a little name calling and insults. Simple game of "I gotcha."
> When I first suggested that America's most noted historians have graded FDR highly since 1948, her answer was historians are communists. Her evidence for historians being communists was that historians voted highly for FDR. How does one respond to that type of reasoning. I read some of her posts, now with amusement but certainly not seriously, but as the sham they are.
> 
> 
> 
> PC is playing a game where she channels Ann Coulter
> 
> The game is....watch me piss off the liberals
> She makes bizarre claims, then giggles as liberals refute her.....she responds with unrelated cut and pastes ...Rinse and Repeat
> 
> For some reason, she gets a chuckle out of it....watch for more tomorrow
Click to expand...




Another excuse by a dunce who can't refute the facts I provide.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Samson said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You realize we've been saying this for years.
Click to expand...



Then you haven't, learned much during all those years, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's do
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay lets do a little test:
> What was the date that FDR died?
> What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
> How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.
> 
> When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?
> 
> What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?
> 
> How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?
> 
> How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?
> 
> Make a much different test.
> 
> Best of luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk
> 
> Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
> Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> "Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany –* FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!*
> 
> What is most weird and most disturbing about *Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."*
> West, "American Betrayal," p.266
> 
> 
> 
> Get that?  Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No- just your usual obsessive anti-FDR crap.
Click to expand...



I eschew barnyard vulgarisms in favor of truth.


This is what I posted and you were unable to deny:


It's been quite a long expose, comparing *a true American President, Ronald Reagan, *with one who endorsed, espoused, supported and advanced doctrines and political ideas alien to our Founders.
Of course, the later is the BFF of Joseph Stalin......Franklin Delano Roosevelt.


*Let's go over what you've been taught in this lesson*, and remind all that the lap-dogs of totalianism have been unable to deny the truths revealed:


1. *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*


2. ... through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts,  communism found a home in the United States.
a. In his book, _Witness_, Whittaker Chambers explains is disillusionment with communism as follows.   
                                                                                                                                           In 1938, he determined not only to break with the Communist Party, but to inform on the Party when he could. The reason was that he was informed that Stalin was making efforts to align with Hitler, in 1939, and “from any human point of view, the pact was evil.” 

As Hitler marched into Poland, Chambers arranged a private meeting with Adolf Berle, President Roosevelt’s assistant Sec’y of State. *Chambers detailed the Communist espionage network, naming at least two dozen Soviet spies in Roosevelt’s administration,* including Alger Hiss.
*
Berle reported this to Roosevelt, who laughed, and told Berle to go f---  himself.* (Arthur Herman, Joseph McCarthy: Reexaming the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, p. 60) 



3. On*November 16, 1933*, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union.

*There was no explanation for this embrace of the blood-drenched Bolsheviks. *

He certainly didn't need Stalin as an ally against Hitler: There was no indication that Stalin and Hitler would be at odds, after all, their doctrines sprang from the same source.
And, they were allies for some 15 year.



Note that not a single thing in this post is open to debate: every single thing is true.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> 
> He failed at the war as he did at solving the Depression, both of which he extended by years with the commensurate casualties each caused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now here is the pattern: I will destroy this statement with facts and quotes....and the dolt who wrote it will provide the oh-so-insightful 'sez you!!!'
> 
> Watch:
> "....preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> 1. “Though FDR is treated in many histories as a far-seeing statesman waging a great crusade for freedom, the record provided by the Folsoms, backed by their extensive researches, shows us something different.* In lack of preparedness during the run-up to the war (while contriving to get us into it), thereafter in many phases of its conduct, and most of all in the end game played out with the Soviet dictator Stalin at Teheran and Yalta, Roosevelt made countless tragic blunders, …* In particular, by various wartime stratagems he pursued and postwar policies he favored, he materially increased the strength of the Soviet Union and so helped consign untold numbers of suffering victims to its despotic rule.”              M. Stanton Evans
> 
> 
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war.
> a.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> b.  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.
> 
> 3. Why prepare?
> Due to cuts in military spending through the 30’s as a percentage of the federal budget, the United States was woefully unprepared for war. The US was 17th in the world in military strength, and this ultimately let us into a two-ocean war.
> 
> 
> 4. The more astute knew what was coming.
> 
> a. Admiral Richardson pleaded with the President to move the Pearl Harbor fleet to the mainland…but he not only would not listen… “Prior to the attack, Admiral Richardson was stripped of his command of Pearl Harbor by FDR, for warning of the fleet's vulnerability.”                                               http://www.thehiddenevil.com/pearl.asp
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now watch this imbecile's response to that unassailable argument....propbably the same one he keeps trying: "you....you....you Nazi, you!!!!"
Click to expand...

 
Lets see...

Where are we today?

PC makes her usual wild FDR claims
Her claims are mocked and refuted by her liberal targets
PC ignores the counter arguments and just reposts her original claims

Rinse/Repeat


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> 
> He failed at the war as he did at solving the Depression, both of which he extended by years with the commensurate casualties each caused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now here is the pattern: I will destroy this statement with facts and quotes....and the dolt who wrote it will provide the oh-so-insightful 'sez you!!!'
> 
> Watch:
> "....preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> 1. “Though FDR is treated in many histories as a far-seeing statesman waging a great crusade for freedom, the record provided by the Folsoms, backed by their extensive researches, shows us something different.* In lack of preparedness during the run-up to the war (while contriving to get us into it), thereafter in many phases of its conduct, and most of all in the end game played out with the Soviet dictator Stalin at Teheran and Yalta, Roosevelt made countless tragic blunders, …* In particular, by various wartime stratagems he pursued and postwar policies he favored, he materially increased the strength of the Soviet Union and so helped consign untold numbers of suffering victims to its despotic rule.”              M. Stanton Evans
> 
> 
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war.
> a.  On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
> b.  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.
> 
> 3. Why prepare?
> Due to cuts in military spending through the 30’s as a percentage of the federal budget, the United States was woefully unprepared for war. The US was 17th in the world in military strength, and this ultimately let us into a two-ocean war.
> 
> 
> 4. The more astute knew what was coming.
> 
> a. Admiral Richardson pleaded with the President to move the Pearl Harbor fleet to the mainland…but he not only would not listen… “Prior to the attack, Admiral Richardson was stripped of his command of Pearl Harbor by FDR, for warning of the fleet's vulnerability.”                                               http://www.thehiddenevil.com/pearl.asp
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now watch this imbecile's response to that unassailable argument....propbably the same one he keeps trying: "you....you....you Nazi, you!!!!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lets see...
> 
> Where are we today?
> 
> PC makes her usual wild FDR claims
> Her claims are mocked and refuted by her liberal targets
> PC ignores the counter arguments and just reposts her original claims
> 
> Rinse/Repeat
Click to expand...



"PC makes her usual wild FDR claims"
Everything I post is correct, accurate, documented and true.
You, a typical Liberal liar.



"Her claims are mocked and refuted by her liberal targets"
Mocked as a substitute for denied.


"PC ignores the counter arguments and just reposts her original claims"
There are no 'counter arguments' out side of 'is not, is noootttttt!'

You failed to even mention a single one of the facts posted in the post to which you linked.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread....as is true of so very many others, reveals the inability and low nature of the defenders of myth and totalitarian governance on the Left.....
> ...versus the-truth tellers of the Right.
> 
> 
> 
> The pantheon of posts from the Leftists are 'is not,is not,' without any support for the denials...
> 
> ....outright lies about imagined success of their demigods,....
> 
> ....ignoring the malevolence and misbehavior of their lords and masters,,,,
> 
> ,,,charges that any who reveal the truth are fascists and Nazis......
> 
> ...and a multitude of attacks on your poor reporter....moi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As this thread has become quite long.....it behooves me to remind of some of the truths it provided and the Roosevelt lap-dogs were unable to refute...
> 
> 
> 
> So it will be done in the next several posts.
> 
> 
> 
> Your lies have indeed been refuted. It is the reason your thread is so long. You keep ignoring the beating you get as your assertions are debunked. Your method of prolonging the thread is simply to not answer challenges and move on to new lies and misrepresentations.
> For a reminder, I challenged your lie about FDR not preparing the military for WWII with links to the modern weapons he had developed quietly as he prepared industry to transform into war production. One of the things celebrated about FDR is the way he did in fact, prepare the US military for WWII. You take a distorted single quote to promote your lie. I provided numerous links to debunk that lie.
Click to expand...




OK...ok.....stop begging.....

....here's another chance at what you laughingly call 'refuting lies."


4. FDR knew of the Terror Famine...designed and perpetrated by 'Uncle Joe,'...yet , according to Time Mag, he *enveloped Joe Stalin in " the cloak of his popularity..."*
Time Magazine, December 17, 1934.

*True or not???????*


5. *Roosevelt knew the nature of the other side when he offered the partnership. President Reagan acted in the very opposite fashion, standing for the Constitution and the values it honored.

Roosevelt kissed the Bolshevik's........regime.
Reagan ended it.


True or not??????




Waiting.*


----------



## Samson

PoliticalChic said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You realize we've been saying this for years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then you haven't, learned much during all those years, huh?
Click to expand...


Well, since you asked: I've learned not to waste my time reading your ad hominem, cut-n-paste drivel.

I have not learned that you require event the simplest concepts to be carefully explained:

It amazes, that others, even those that have known you for _*YEARS*_ will not only respond to your randomized blithering quotes, but then continue to complain about your infantile style. Although I doubt they'll take the suggestion, instead of trying to alter PoliticalChic , they should just accept your chronically idiotic babble.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Samson said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name a single one...without tedious cut and paste
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You realize we've been saying this for years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then you haven't, learned much during all those years, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, since you asked: I've learned not to waste my time reading your ad hominem, cut-n-paste drivel.
> 
> I have not learned that you require event the simplest concepts to be carefully explained:
> 
> It amazes, that others, even those that have known you for _*YEARS*_ will not only respond to your randomized blithering quotes, but then continue to complain about your infantile style. Although I doubt they'll take the suggestion, instead of trying to alter PoliticalChic , they should just accept your chronically idiotic babble.
Click to expand...




You haven't learned anything.

Everything I post is true, accurate, and documented.

Stick to something you can do…like playing cowbells.


----------



## Dot Com

rightwinger said:


> Lets see...
> 
> Where are we today?
> 
> PC makes her usual wild FDR claims
> Her claims are mocked and refuted by her liberal targets
> PC ignores the counter arguments and just reposts her original claims
> 
> Rinse/Repeat


EVERY ONE of her zany threads


----------



## Dot Com

Dot Com said:


> how many criminal convictions were there in the Gipper's Admin?


OP ever answer the above question?


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
Click to expand...


The armament industry, the so-called MIC, knew exactly what FDR was doing and they agreed with him with motivation and sincerity. Forts, bases, and air strips were being built and expanded through public works projects. They saw the massive plan to replace the weapons of the 20's and early 30's, most of which could not compete with the advanced weapons of Japan and Germany.
No doubt PC has no concept to the time and process of development it took to replace America's weaponry for WWII. Nor does she have an inkling of knowledge of what is involved with retooling factories to produce those weapons. 

FDR ordered the first attacks on Japan 13 days after Pearl Harbor with the attack on Japanese pilots and aircraft on Dec. 20 by the Flying Tigers who officially entered the China campaign with 39 P-40's which had been forward deployed as "volunteers". The effort to support the Chinese against Japan had been begun in August 1937.

Here is a very partial list of the over 160 projects named as "military" in the list of New Deal Projects. 

Fort Knox Barracks 1935
Fort Hamilton Improvements, Brooklyn, NY
MARCH FIELD
MITCHEL FIELD
NAVEL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER. Bethesda, MD
PORTLAND ARMY AIRBASE  Started 1936 and completed 1940.
WINTER HARBOR NAVY BASE-MAINE
Fort Simms Coast Guard Station 
US MARINE HOSPITAL-MEMPHIS TENNESEE 1935
US Navel Magazine and Torpedo Factory-Alexandria, VA

This short list is only a handful of preparations the US was making under FDR's guidance and only include works done by New Deal relief agencies.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is academic lazyness on your part
> 
> Making a position and using references to support your position is justifiable
> 
> Cut and paste without forming your own conclusions is just fucking lazy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The armament industry, the so-called MIC, knew exactly what FDR was doing and they agreed with him with motivation and sincerity. Forts, bases, and air strips were being built and expanded through public works projects. They saw the massive plan to replace the weapons of the 20's and early 30's, most of which could not compete with the advanced weapons of Japan and Germany.
> No doubt PC has no concept to the time and process of development it took to replace America's weaponry for WWII. Nor does she have an inkling of knowledge of what is involved with retooling factories to produce those weapons.
> 
> FDR ordered the first attacks on Japan 13 days after Pearl Harbor with the attack on Japanese pilots and aircraft on Dec. 20 by the Flying Tigers who officially entered the China campaign with 39 P-40's which had been forward deployed as "volunteers". The effort to support the Chinese against Japan had been begun in August 1937.
> 
> Here is a very partial list of the over 160 projects named as "military" in the list of New Deal Projects.
> 
> Fort Knox Barracks 1935
> Fort Hamilton Improvements, Brooklyn, NY
> MARCH FIELD
> MITCHEL FIELD
> NAVEL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER. Bethesda, MD
> PORTLAND ARMY AIRBASE  Started 1936 and completed 1940.
> WINTER HARBOR NAVY BASE-MAINE
> Fort Simms Coast Guard Station
> US MARINE HOSPITAL-MEMPHIS TENNESEE 1935
> US Navel Magazine and Torpedo Factory-Alexandria, VA
> 
> This short list is only a handful of preparations the US was making under FDR's guidance and only include works done by New Deal relief agencies.
Click to expand...




Hmmmm.....you declined to include the facts in the post....

....must mean that they were all true, and had you shaking in your jammies.


As I said....FDR was clueless about the impending war, and did not prepare the nation for same.

And he had been warned and advised repeatedly.

You've verified my post and revealed yourself to be a sniveling liar.

The usual denouement.


----------



## PoliticalChic

*Looks like the Liberals were lying when they claimed they 'refuted' any of the posts that offended them....*

*Here's more that they won't be able to deny:*



*Even more outrageous than Obama being given the Noble Peace Prize was Walter Duranty being given the Pulitzer Prize in 1932. 
Both represent the bias of Liberal 'authorities' and the disrespect for truth and integrity.*
"Principle is nothing to liberals. Winning is everything."
*Coulter*



*6. Walter Duranty of the NYTimes sent glowing reports of the wonders of the 'worker's paradise.' He, Duranty, aided one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true.*


*And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth.*

*True or not??????*



7. Roosevelt foisted *lie after lie* on the American public in support of Soviet Communism.

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was freedom of religion in the USSR.   "The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in a massive *pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow,"  byDennis J. Dunn, p. 137


*True or not??????*


----------



## Syriusly

Unkotare said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
Click to expand...


Wow- I can almost see the spittle on your monitor from your angst.

Absolutely no doubt that FDR worst decision- and blemish on America- was the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry- something that many Conservatives to this day insist was the right thing to do. Hell my grandmother- and most Americans- unfortunately- thought it was the right thing to do. 

'His spaghetti approach' to the economy? Worked- at least worked better than the absolutely nothing that Hoover had been doing.
Unemployment went from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1941. 
You hate social security and unemployment insurance- most Americans are grateful for these programs that help Americans. 
"Sucking Stalin's" dick? That just shows you are an idiot.
His infidelity to his wife? How does that change how he was as President- such infidelity is something he shared with Eisenhower, Clinton and of course GOP hopeful Donald Trump- something I don't approve of- but doesn't change any of their performances as President. 
The St. Louis? While I wish FDR had helped the passengers of the St. Louis- unlike the case of Japanese Americans, FDR was both following the law, and could argue that allowing the St. Louis passengers would have denied entry to thousands of German Jews who were in line to come into the U.S.
_Quotas established in the US Immigration and Nationality Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted to the United States each year. In 1939, the annual combined German-Austrian immigration quota was 27,370 and was quickly filled. In fact, there was a waiting list of at least several years. US officials could only have granted visas to the St. Louis passengers by denying them to the thousands of German Jews placed further up on the waiting list._
Campaign lies? _Oh no a Presidential campaign with lies.....getting pretty desperate to find something to attack FDR eh?_
Attempting to pack the court? Stupid politically but what he proposed was not only legal- but had been proposed before.
Running for a third and fourth term? Perfectly Constitutional- and the voters approved._ Why exactly are you upset that the voters chose FDR?_

Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President

_From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
_At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
_At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
_At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
_While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
_At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
_Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
_Unemployment insurance was instituted_
_Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
_One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _


_
_


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> *And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth.*



Well by that standard then he would have a lot in common with you. 


Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President- tell me why you object to each of these accomplishments

_From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
_At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
_At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
_At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
_While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
_At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
_Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
_Unemployment insurance was instituted_
_Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
_One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I asked:
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> So....based on your response....it is the former?
> 
> The profanity is a give-away.
> 
> 
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The armament industry, the so-called MIC, knew exactly what FDR was doing and they agreed with him with motivation and sincerity. Forts, bases, and air strips were being built and expanded through public works projects. They saw the massive plan to replace the weapons of the 20's and early 30's, most of which could not compete with the advanced weapons of Japan and Germany.
> No doubt PC has no concept to the time and process of development it took to replace America's weaponry for WWII. Nor does she have an inkling of knowledge of what is involved with retooling factories to produce those weapons.
> 
> FDR ordered the first attacks on Japan 13 days after Pearl Harbor with the attack on Japanese pilots and aircraft on Dec. 20 by the Flying Tigers who officially entered the China campaign with 39 P-40's which had been forward deployed as "volunteers". The effort to support the Chinese against Japan had been begun in August 1937.
> 
> Here is a very partial list of the over 160 projects named as "military" in the list of New Deal Projects.
> 
> Fort Knox Barracks 1935
> Fort Hamilton Improvements, Brooklyn, NY
> MARCH FIELD
> MITCHEL FIELD
> NAVEL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER. Bethesda, MD
> PORTLAND ARMY AIRBASE  Started 1936 and completed 1940.
> WINTER HARBOR NAVY BASE-MAINE
> Fort Simms Coast Guard Station
> US MARINE HOSPITAL-MEMPHIS TENNESEE 1935
> US Navel Magazine and Torpedo Factory-Alexandria, VA
> 
> This short list is only a handful of preparations the US was making under FDR's guidance and only include works done by New Deal relief agencies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm.....you declined to include the facts in the post....
> 
> ....must mean that they were all true, and had you shaking in your jammies.
> 
> 
> As I said....FDR was clueless about the impending war, and did not prepare the nation for same.
> 
> And he had been warned and advised repeatedly.
> 
> You've verified my post and revealed yourself to be a sniveling liar.
> 
> The usual denouement.
Click to expand...

Every item I listed, from the Flying Tigers and Chennault to the list of military projects can be confirmed by simply typing what I referenced into a search of google, bing, etc. I have already listed links to some of the weapons developed such as the M-1 Garand, the B-17, P-38, ESSEX CLASS Carriers, etc.

What PC is unable to do, is to explain why the data I provided does not debunk her nonsense. That is because she doesn't really have a cut and paste method of refuting. She does not have the knowledge nor expertise to make an intellectual response because she is clueless about the topic she is trying to promote.

In reality, PC's response is sad and beyond lame. After obtaining a list of just a handful of the projects and programs put into motion by FDR, building, expanding and improving military bases, including huge airbases on both the west and east coast, developing training centers forts to train and house, increasing the size and capabilities of military hospitals, and the all-important development of the aircraft, ships and hardware need to win the war, the conspiracy theorist simply says none of that counts. She does so without a shred of evidence to contest that her nonsense has been debunked.


----------



## Dot Com

How many criminal convictions were there in the Reagan Admin PoliticalSpice?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- I can almost see the spittle on your monitor from your angst.
> 
> Absolutely no doubt that FDR worst decision- and blemish on America- was the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry- something that many Conservatives to this day insist was the right thing to do. Hell my grandmother- and most Americans- unfortunately- thought it was the right thing to do.
> 
> 'His spaghetti approach' to the economy? Worked- at least worked better than the absolutely nothing that Hoover had been doing.
> Unemployment went from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1941.
> You hate social security and unemployment insurance- most Americans are grateful for these programs that help Americans.
> "Sucking Stalin's" dick? That just shows you are an idiot.
> His infidelity to his wife? How does that change how he was as President- such infidelity is something he shared with Eisenhower, Clinton and of course GOP hopeful Donald Trump- something I don't approve of- but doesn't change any of their performances as President.
> The St. Louis? While I wish FDR had helped the passengers of the St. Louis- unlike the case of Japanese Americans, FDR was both following the law, and could argue that allowing the St. Louis passengers would have denied entry to thousands of German Jews who were in line to come into the U.S.
> _Quotas established in the US Immigration and Nationality Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted to the United States each year. In 1939, the annual combined German-Austrian immigration quota was 27,370 and was quickly filled. In fact, there was a waiting list of at least several years. US officials could only have granted visas to the St. Louis passengers by denying them to the thousands of German Jews placed further up on the waiting list._
> Campaign lies? _Oh no a Presidential campaign with lies.....getting pretty desperate to find something to attack FDR eh?_
> Attempting to pack the court? Stupid politically but what he proposed was not only legal- but had been proposed before.
> Running for a third and fourth term? Perfectly Constitutional- and the voters approved._ Why exactly are you upset that the voters chose FDR?_
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
Click to expand...







Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well by that standard then he would have a lot in common with you.
> 
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President- tell me why you object to each of these accomplishments
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
Click to expand...



This was the post you've linked to:

*Looks like the Liberals were lying when they claimed they 'refuted' any of the posts that offended them....*

*Here's more that they won't be able to deny:*



*Even more outrageous than Obama being given the Noble Peace Prize was Walter Duranty being given the Pulitzer Prize in 1932.
Both represent the bias of Liberal 'authorities' and the disrespect for truth and integrity.*
"Principle is nothing to liberals. Winning is everything."
*Coulter*



*6. Walter Duranty of the NYTimes sent glowing reports of the wonders of the 'worker's paradise.' He, Duranty, aided one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true.*


*And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth.*

*True or not??????*



7. Roosevelt foisted*lie after lie*on the American public in support of Soviet Communism.

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was freedom of religion in the USSR. "The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in a massive*pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," byDennis J. Dunn, p. 137


*True or not??????


Yet, you only included this: "And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth."

Then you tried to get away with this: "by that standard then he would have a lot in common with you."

So....first a lie of omission, then a lie of commission.

You're illustrated exactly what I've said about you: you're a low-life, Liberal liar.


Every single thing in my post was correct, true, and accurate.
Including my characterization of you.

*


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> As I said....FDR was clueless about the impending war, and did not prepare the nation for same.
> .



And of course you are just lying again. FDR never idolized Stalin, Hitler or Mussolini.

And as I pointed out- FDR dragged the United States very reluctantly to prepare for the war he saw coming- if Japan had waited another year we would largely have been prepared. Considering that the America that FDR was elected to represent was staunchly isolationist- that is quite the accomplishment. 

Consider the expansion of the Navy under FDR in advance of WW2

_By 1934, 15 new cruisers and one aircraft carrier - the USS Ranger - had been commissioned but, under the Five-Year Program, had not been provided aircraft complements. These unsatisfied requirements totaled over 200 aircraft, and the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act authorized the immediate expansion of the aircraft inventory to accommodate these demands.

 The report by the Secretary of the Navy for 1935 shows the condition of the fleet then and the immediate plans regarding expansion. To the Trammel-Vinson Act, Congress had added a sizable appropriation, which would permit the continuance of construction begun under earlier allocations and would also allow 24 additional keels to be laid. The manufacture of guns had gone on, evidently with some rapidity. Considerations of security had already begun to operate, however, because the Secretary this time purposely omitted stating the number of each caliber turned out. The guns ranged from 5-inch 25's to 16-inch 45's, with accessories, such as breech plugs, mounts, sights, gun directors, and torpedo tubes. 

 In 1936, Congress authorized the construction of six new cruisers and two large aircraft carriers -* the USS Yorktown and USS Enterprise*. Combined with the already outstanding aircraft requirements, the new fleet requirements stood at 273 new aircraft, all of which were automatically approved under the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act. The flexibility provided by the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act proved extremely valuable during the fleet's expansion program. The Bureau of Aeronautics estimated that by 1940, it would require some 2,000 aircraft to outfit the growing fleet, including those required for the new vessels planned under the current expansion program. 

 The Congressional Appropriation Act for 1937 provided preliminary plans for two new battleships, and work on them began the following year. A similar act in 1938 provided for eight destroyers and four submarines, while by a special piece of legislation, at about the same time, Congress permitted the replacement of two overage battleships by new ones. The purpose of all this building, in line with the original provisos of the Trammel-Vinson Act, was to increase by 20 percent the under-age strength of the U.S. Navy.



*Naval Expansion Act of 1938*

In 1938 Congress passed President Roosevelt's Naval Expansion Act. This act called for across-the-board increases of 20 percent in the Navy's fleet strength. The aircraft inventory was likewise authorized to grow to a strength of not less than 3,000 planes by 1945. Of course all these new planes would require pilots and basing facilities, both of which were authorized in this important act. By this time, it had become clear to leadership in the Navy and in Congress that it was futile to attempt to expand naval aviation operations without a corresponding expansion of the infrastructure that was necessary to support them._

_Ship Building 1933-45 - Roosevelt, Franklin D._

The Yorktown and the Enterprise? _Any person who has read of WW2 knows the significance of the decision to build those ships. 





_


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The armament industry, the so-called MIC, knew exactly what FDR was doing and they agreed with him with motivation and sincerity. Forts, bases, and air strips were being built and expanded through public works projects. They saw the massive plan to replace the weapons of the 20's and early 30's, most of which could not compete with the advanced weapons of Japan and Germany.
> No doubt PC has no concept to the time and process of development it took to replace America's weaponry for WWII. Nor does she have an inkling of knowledge of what is involved with retooling factories to produce those weapons.
> 
> FDR ordered the first attacks on Japan 13 days after Pearl Harbor with the attack on Japanese pilots and aircraft on Dec. 20 by the Flying Tigers who officially entered the China campaign with 39 P-40's which had been forward deployed as "volunteers". The effort to support the Chinese against Japan had been begun in August 1937.
> 
> Here is a very partial list of the over 160 projects named as "military" in the list of New Deal Projects.
> 
> Fort Knox Barracks 1935
> Fort Hamilton Improvements, Brooklyn, NY
> MARCH FIELD
> MITCHEL FIELD
> NAVEL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER. Bethesda, MD
> PORTLAND ARMY AIRBASE  Started 1936 and completed 1940.
> WINTER HARBOR NAVY BASE-MAINE
> Fort Simms Coast Guard Station
> US MARINE HOSPITAL-MEMPHIS TENNESEE 1935
> US Navel Magazine and Torpedo Factory-Alexandria, VA
> 
> This short list is only a handful of preparations the US was making under FDR's guidance and only include works done by New Deal relief agencies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm.....you declined to include the facts in the post....
> 
> ....must mean that they were all true, and had you shaking in your jammies.
> 
> 
> As I said....FDR was clueless about the impending war, and did not prepare the nation for same.
> 
> And he had been warned and advised repeatedly.
> 
> You've verified my post and revealed yourself to be a sniveling liar.
> 
> The usual denouement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every item I listed, from the Flying Tigers and Chennault to the list of military projects can be confirmed by simply typing what I referenced into a search of google, bing, etc. I have already listed links to some of the weapons developed such as the M-1 Garand, the B-17, P-38, ESSEX CLASS Carriers, etc.
> 
> What PC is unable to do, is to explain why the data I provided does not debunk her nonsense. That is because she doesn't really have a cut and paste method of refuting. She does not have the knowledge nor expertise to make an intellectual response because she is clueless about the topic she is trying to promote.
> 
> In reality, PC's response is sad and beyond lame. After obtaining a list of just a handful of the projects and programs put into motion by FDR, building, expanding and improving military bases, including huge airbases on both the west and east coast, developing training centers forts to train and house, increasing the size and capabilities of military hospitals, and the all-important development of the aircraft, ships and hardware need to win the war, the conspiracy theorist simply says none of that counts. She does so without a shred of evidence to contest that her nonsense has been debunked.
Click to expand...




This was the post you've tried to ignore:

Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.

"FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."

Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.

He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.

He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.


He failed at the war as he did at solving the Depression, both of which he extended by years with the commensurate casualties each caused.




Now here is the pattern: I will destroy this statement with facts and quotes....and the dolt who wrote it will provide the oh-so-insightful 'sez you!!!'

Watch:
"....preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."

1. “Though FDR is treated in many histories as a far-seeing statesman waging a great crusade for freedom, the record provided by the Folsoms, backed by their extensive researches, shows us something different.*In lack of preparedness during the run-up to the war (while contriving to get us into it), thereafter in many phases of its conduct, and most of all in the end game played out with the Soviet dictator Stalin at Teheran and Yalta, Roosevelt made countless tragic blunders, …*In particular, by various wartime stratagems he pursued and postwar policies he favored, he materially increased the strength of the Soviet Union and so helped consign untold numbers of suffering victims to its despotic rule.” M. Stanton Evans


2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war.
a. On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”
b. 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.

3. Why prepare?
Due to cuts in military spending through the 30’s as a percentage of the federal budget, the United States was woefully unprepared for war. The US was 17th in the world in military strength, and this ultimately let us into a two-ocean war.


4. The more astute knew what was coming.

a. Admiral Richardson pleaded with the President to move the Pearl Harbor fleet to the mainland…but he not only would not listen… “Prior to the attack, Admiral Richardson was stripped of his command of Pearl Harbor by FDR, for warning of the fleet's vulnerability.”http://www.thehiddenevil.com/pearl.asp

b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.




You were unable to find a single error in same.

Nailed FDR.....and destroying you was just a bonus.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> As I said....FDR was clueless about the impending war, and did not prepare the nation for same.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And of course you are just lying again. FDR never idolized Stalin, Hitler or Mussolini.
> 
> And as I pointed out- FDR dragged the United States very reluctantly to prepare for the war he saw coming- if Japan had waited another year we would largely have been prepared. Considering that the America that FDR was elected to represent was staunchly isolationist- that is quite the accomplishment.
> 
> Consider the expansion of the Navy under FDR in advance of WW2
> 
> _By 1934, 15 new cruisers and one aircraft carrier - the USS Ranger - had been commissioned but, under the Five-Year Program, had not been provided aircraft complements. These unsatisfied requirements totaled over 200 aircraft, and the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act authorized the immediate expansion of the aircraft inventory to accommodate these demands.
> 
> The report by the Secretary of the Navy for 1935 shows the condition of the fleet then and the immediate plans regarding expansion. To the Trammel-Vinson Act, Congress had added a sizable appropriation, which would permit the continuance of construction begun under earlier allocations and would also allow 24 additional keels to be laid. The manufacture of guns had gone on, evidently with some rapidity. Considerations of security had already begun to operate, however, because the Secretary this time purposely omitted stating the number of each caliber turned out. The guns ranged from 5-inch 25's to 16-inch 45's, with accessories, such as breech plugs, mounts, sights, gun directors, and torpedo tubes.
> 
> In 1936, Congress authorized the construction of six new cruisers and two large aircraft carriers -* the USS Yorktown and USS Enterprise*. Combined with the already outstanding aircraft requirements, the new fleet requirements stood at 273 new aircraft, all of which were automatically approved under the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act. The flexibility provided by the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act proved extremely valuable during the fleet's expansion program. The Bureau of Aeronautics estimated that by 1940, it would require some 2,000 aircraft to outfit the growing fleet, including those required for the new vessels planned under the current expansion program.
> 
> The Congressional Appropriation Act for 1937 provided preliminary plans for two new battleships, and work on them began the following year. A similar act in 1938 provided for eight destroyers and four submarines, while by a special piece of legislation, at about the same time, Congress permitted the replacement of two overage battleships by new ones. The purpose of all this building, in line with the original provisos of the Trammel-Vinson Act, was to increase by 20 percent the under-age strength of the U.S. Navy.
> 
> 
> 
> *Naval Expansion Act of 1938*
> 
> In 1938 Congress passed President Roosevelt's Naval Expansion Act. This act called for across-the-board increases of 20 percent in the Navy's fleet strength. The aircraft inventory was likewise authorized to grow to a strength of not less than 3,000 planes by 1945. Of course all these new planes would require pilots and basing facilities, both of which were authorized in this important act. By this time, it had become clear to leadership in the Navy and in Congress that it was futile to attempt to expand naval aviation operations without a corresponding expansion of the infrastructure that was necessary to support them._
> 
> _Ship Building 1933-45 - Roosevelt, Franklin D._
> 
> The Yorktown and the Enterprise? _Any person who has read of WW2 knows the significance of the decision to build those ships.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
Click to expand...




"And of course you are just lying again. FDR never idolized Stalin, Hitler or Mussolini."

So saith the windbag.


1. Roosevelt's own book could have been written by Hitler:
The National Socialists hailed these ‘relief measures’ in ways you will recognize:

May 11, 1933, the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, (People’s Observer): “Roosevelt’s Dictatorial Recovery Measures.”
And on January 17, 1934, “We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America…” and “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” comparable to Hitler’s own dictatorial ‘Fuhrerprinzip.’
And “[Roosevelt], too demands that collective good be put before individual self-interest. *Many passages in his book ‘Looking Forward’ could have been written by a National Socialist….one can assume that he feels considerable affinity with the National Socialist philosophy.”*
The paper also refers to “…the fictional appearance of democracy.”
2. In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…”  cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.

English and French commentators routinely depicted* Roosevelt as akin to Mussolini.* A more specific reason why, 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.
Herbert Hoover: “We must fight again for a government founded on individual liberty and opportunity that was the American vision. If we lose we will continue down this New Deal road to some sort of personal government based on collectivist theories. Under these ideas ours can become some sort of Fascist government.”
“The similarities of the economics of the New Deal to the economics of Mussolini’s corporative state or Hitler’s totalitarian state are both close and obvious.” Norman Thomas, head of the American Socialist Party.   
*"Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939"*
by Wolfgang Schivelbusch 

c.  “Schivelbusch occasionally overreaches, as when he writes that *Roosevelt once referred to Stalin and Mussolini as “his ‘blood brothers.’ ”* (In fact, it seems clear in Schivelbusch’s source—Arthur Schlesinger’s _The Age of Roosevelt_—that FDR was saying communism and fascism were blood brothers to _each other_, not to _him_.) But overall, this is a formidable piece of scholarship.” Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt

d.  Roosevelt’s Sec’y of the Interior, proclaimed:* “What we are doing in this country were some of the things that were being done in Russia and even some things that were being done under Hitler in Germany.” *Confirmed:Roosevelt Ended the Great Depression When He Died


----------



## PoliticalChic

Yup...Roosevelt was a devotee of Benitio Mussolini....he based his entire economic plan on Mussolini's.

1. RexfordTugwell, FDR's economic guru,  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." 
Chesley Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48*


----------



## regent

I am starting to suspect Reagan of chicanery. He pretended to be a Democrat, a union leader and voted for FDR. Then bingo he changes and becomes a Republican and begins dealing with the USSR. He makes deals with Gorby and they become partners. Using PC's analytical skills I think a strong case could be made that Reagan was an FDR plant, that gave away America. And Reagan's defense in the Iran-Contra thing was the best yet, _I forget, _124 times.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "



Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?

Chapter 19: Between World Wars

_No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._

_Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*

To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_


----------



## PoliticalChic

The starting point, of course, is how quickly Roosevelt made his feelings for Stalin known: almost as soon as he attained the presidency: 1933!

FDR jumped....leapt!.....to endorse the Bolsheviks, while previous Presidents knew better.
There is no explanation, other than ideology, that passes the laugh test.
Roosevelt wanted to run with the big boys: Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler.
He craved the power, and despised the restrictions imposed by the Constitution.
This, of course, is true of Obama as well.


8. How did the Soviets view the actions of their little puppet, FDR?

They laughed at the love-sick puppy.


When Roosevelt recognized the Soviet Communist empire, USSR Minister Litvinov laughed about it: *The Russians laughed about their alleged promises *of future behavior. This is the conversation that Litvinov had with staff at his embassy after the 'agreement' was signed:


"Well, it's all in the bag. They wanted us to *recognize the debts *we owed them and I promised we were going to negotiate. But they did not know we were going to negotiate until doomsday. The next one was a corker; they wanted us to*promise freedom of religion in*the Soviet Union, and I promised that, too. I was very much prompted to offer that *I would personally collect all the Bibles *and ship them over."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.33.


In March 1943 Foreign Minister Litvinov, incredibly, handed over a list of American diplomats in the State Department that the Soviets wanted fired....a "guilt offering to Stalin from Roosevelt"...
West, "American Betrayal," p.193

And guess what Roosevelt did?
Yup....he fired them


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Yup...Roosevelt was a devotee of Benitio Mussolini....he based his entire economic plan on Mussolini's.
> 
> 1. RexfordTugwell, FDR's economic guru,  was *opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *



However, in reality- FDR did not propose the nationalization of any industry. 

You are delusional.

Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> The starting point, of course, is how quickly Roosevelt made his feelings for Stalin known: almost as soon as he attained the presidency: 1933!



FDR recognized the Soviet Union
Nixon recognized Communist China

That is what President's do. 

What part of FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2 and emerging as the most powerful country in the world do you object to?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- I can almost see the spittle on your monitor from your angst.
> 
> Absolutely no doubt that FDR worst decision- and blemish on America- was the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry- something that many Conservatives to this day insist was the right thing to do. Hell my grandmother- and most Americans- unfortunately- thought it was the right thing to do.
> 
> 'His spaghetti approach' to the economy? Worked- at least worked better than the absolutely nothing that Hoover had been doing.
> Unemployment went from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1941.
> You hate social security and unemployment insurance- most Americans are grateful for these programs that help Americans.
> "Sucking Stalin's" dick? That just shows you are an idiot.
> His infidelity to his wife? How does that change how he was as President- such infidelity is something he shared with Eisenhower, Clinton and of course GOP hopeful Donald Trump- something I don't approve of- but doesn't change any of their performances as President.
> The St. Louis? While I wish FDR had helped the passengers of the St. Louis- unlike the case of Japanese Americans, FDR was both following the law, and could argue that allowing the St. Louis passengers would have denied entry to thousands of German Jews who were in line to come into the U.S.
> _Quotas established in the US Immigration and Nationality Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted to the United States each year. In 1939, the annual combined German-Austrian immigration quota was 27,370 and was quickly filled. In fact, there was a waiting list of at least several years. US officials could only have granted visas to the St. Louis passengers by denying them to the thousands of German Jews placed further up on the waiting list._
> Campaign lies? _Oh no a Presidential campaign with lies.....getting pretty desperate to find something to attack FDR eh?_
> Attempting to pack the court? Stupid politically but what he proposed was not only legal- but had been proposed before.
> Running for a third and fourth term? Perfectly Constitutional- and the voters approved._ Why exactly are you upset that the voters chose FDR?_
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well by that standard then he would have a lot in common with you.
> 
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President- tell me why you object to each of these accomplishments
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was the post you've linked to:
> 
> *Looks like the Liberals were lying when they claimed they 'refuted' any of the posts that offended them....*
> 
> *Here's more that they won't be able to deny:*
> 
> 
> 
> *Even more outrageous than Obama being given the Noble Peace Prize was Walter Duranty being given the Pulitzer Prize in 1932.
> Both represent the bias of Liberal 'authorities' and the disrespect for truth and integrity.*
> "Principle is nothing to liberals. Winning is everything."
> *Coulter*
> 
> 
> 
> *6. Walter Duranty of the NYTimes sent glowing reports of the wonders of the 'worker's paradise.' He, Duranty, aided one of the world's most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true.*
> 
> 
> *And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth.*
> 
> *True or not??????*
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Roosevelt foisted*lie after lie*on the American public in support of Soviet Communism.
> 
> September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was freedom of religion in the USSR. "The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in a massive*pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
> "Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," byDennis J. Dunn, p. 137
> 
> 
> *True or not??????
> 
> 
> Yet, you only included this: "And Franklin Roosevelt did exactly the same thing: he ignored and denied the truth."
> 
> Then you tried to get away with this: "by that standard then he would have a lot in common with you."
> 
> So....first a lie of omission, then a lie of commission.
> 
> You're illustrated exactly what I've said about you: you're a low-life, Liberal liar.
> 
> 
> Every single thing in my post was correct, true, and accurate.
> Including my characterization of you.
> *
Click to expand...


You wouldn't recognize the truth if the orderlies at your home slapped you in the face with it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
Click to expand...



So....was George Marshall lying, too?????

1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". 



2. "May 13, 1940 Marshall went to the White House with a budget proposal for $650- enough to fund an army of a million and a quarter soldiers. Roosevelt dismissed the proposal out of hand. Treasury Secretary Henry Morganthau asked that Marshall be allowed to state his case. The President brushed him off saying "I know exactly what he will say....there is no necessity of me hearing what he will say at all."
*"Soldier, Statesman, Peacemaker: Leadership Lessons from George C. Marshall,"*
By Jack Uldrich, p. 104

3.  "Probably the step most noticed by the general public, and the most controversial one, was the beginning of a draft, compelling men into the armed services. This began in *August, 1940, after the war in Europe had been going on for a year.* It was the first peacetime draft in American history. The draft was to bring one million men into the service, mostly the army, for one year. In 1939, the US had the 21st largest army in the world, with only around 250,000 officers and men. This put US Army strength right behind Bulgaria." How did Roosevelt prepare for the inevitable entry into the war


Two facts in evidence:
a. you're a dunce
b. I'm always 100% correct.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
Click to expand...


Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?

Chapter 19: Between World Wars

_No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._

_Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*

To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> I am starting to suspect Reagan of chicanery. He pretended to be a Democrat, a union leader and voted for FDR. Then bingo he changes and becomes a Republican and begins dealing with the USSR. He makes deals with Gorby and they become partners. Using PC's analytical skills I think a strong case could be made that Reagan was an FDR plant, that gave away America. And Reagan's defense in the Iran-Contra thing was the best yet, _I forget, _124 times.




"He makes deals with Gorby and they become partners."

Only a fool or a Liberal believes that.

"SO ON WHOM or what do we bestow the title of the "evil empire's" killer? Was it Mikhail Gorbachev himself who pulled down what Lenin and Stalin had built up? It is tempting to finger Gorbachev, but this would ascribe too much wisdom and foresight to a man who wanted merely to reform, but not to relinquish, the empire. At no point, however, did Gorbachev want to yield Moscow's pride of place as the number two superpower. And he was blissfully confident that the risks were tolerable: "There is no reason to fear the collapse or the end of socialism", Gorbachev assured Romanian leader Nicolae Ceausescu three weeks after the Berlin Wall had been breached and three weeks before the Romanian dictator was executed by his own people."
The 'Amazing and Mysterious Life' of Ronald Reagan

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_77/ai_n6353166/pg_3/?tag=content;col1



Partners?????

He bent Gorbachev to his will.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
Click to expand...



So....was George Marshall lying, too?????

1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". 



2. "May 13, 1940 Marshall went to the White House with a budget proposal for $650- enough to fund an army of a million and a quarter soldiers. Roosevelt dismissed the proposal out of hand. Treasury Secretary Henry Morganthau asked that Marshall be allowed to state his case. The President brushed him off saying "I know exactly what he will say....there is no necessity of me hearing what he will say at all."
*"Soldier, Statesman, Peacemaker: Leadership Lessons from George C. Marshall,"*
By Jack Uldrich, p. 104

3. "Probably the step most noticed by the general public, and the most controversial one, was the beginning of a draft, compelling men into the armed services. This began in*August, 1940, after the war in Europe had been going on for a year.* It was the first peacetime draft in American history. The draft was to bring one million men into the service, mostly the army, for one year. In 1939, the US had the 21st largest army in the world, with only around 250,000 officers and men. This put US Army strength right behind Bulgaria." How did Roosevelt prepare for the inevitable entry into the war


Two facts in evidence:
a. you're a dunce
b. I'm always 100% correct.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..



Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"..
Click to expand...


Whether 

Chapter 19: Between World Wars

_No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._

_Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*

To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
Click to expand...




Articulate the question ....so I can rip it to shreds.


----------



## Dot Com

Don't encourage PoliChic's FDRDS


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country".t.
Click to expand...


Google search: No such quote by George Marshall found


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Articulate the question ....so I can rip it to shreds.
Click to expand...


Do you want me to type slower?

You said it took FDR 7 years to begin to prepare for the war- 

Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
Click to expand...





Stop lying.

*Roosevelt did nothing to prepare this nation for war until 1940.*

When he suddenly understood what was about to happen....after numerous warnings....*he had to give up the communist goal of 'taming' and subordinating the private economy* and go begging the private industry leaders to pull his bacon out of the fire.

1.   For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting.  The premise of his New Deal, after all was that *businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”*

2.  On* May 16, 1940, *Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”


3.  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


Can't you hear him saying 'forgive me...and, pretty please....help me!!!!'


That was on* May 26, 1940!*


----------



## Syriusly

Oh- and who made the choice of George Marshall?

FDR


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country".t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Google search: No such quote by George Marshall found
Click to expand...



Stop revealing your lack of education.....learn to read a book

It is found here:

"*FDR Goes to War," *by Burton W. Folsom Jr. and Anita Folsom


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop lying.
> 
> *Roosevelt did nothing to prepare this nation for war until 1940.!*
Click to expand...


Bald faced lie

Chapter 19: Between World Wars

_No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._

_Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*

To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men*_


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> View attachment 57647
> 
> View attachment 57648
> 
> Oh- and who made the choice of George Marshall?
> 
> FDR




"By mid-1941" you moron.

Exactly what I said.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Articulate the question ....so I can rip it to shreds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you want me to type slower?
> 
> You said it took FDR 7 years to begin to prepare for the war-
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
Click to expand...




Write a question that makes sense.

I recognize your fear that I will destroy what you write.....and I will.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop lying.
> 
> *Roosevelt did nothing to prepare this nation for war until 1940.!*
Click to expand...


Bald faced lie

Consider the expansion of the Navy under FDR in advance of WW2

_By 1934, 15 new cruisers and one aircraft carrier - the USS Ranger - had been commissioned but, under the Five-Year Program, had not been provided aircraft complements. These unsatisfied requirements totaled over 200 aircraft, and the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act authorized the immediate expansion of the aircraft inventory to accommodate these demands.

The report by the Secretary of the Navy for 1935 shows the condition of the fleet then and the immediate plans regarding expansion. To the Trammel-Vinson Act, Congress had added a sizable appropriation, which would permit the continuance of construction begun under earlier allocations and would also allow 24 additional keels to be laid. The manufacture of guns had gone on, evidently with some rapidity. Considerations of security had already begun to operate, however, because the Secretary this time purposely omitted stating the number of each caliber turned out. The guns ranged from 5-inch 25's to 16-inch 45's, with accessories, such as breech plugs, mounts, sights, gun directors, and torpedo tubes. 

In 1936, Congress authorized the construction of six new cruisers and two large aircraft carriers -* the USS Yorktown and USS Enterprise*. Combined with the already outstanding aircraft requirements, the new fleet requirements stood at 273 new aircraft, all of which were automatically approved under the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act. The flexibility provided by the Vinson-Trammell Navy Act proved extremely valuable during the fleet's expansion program. The Bureau of Aeronautics estimated that by 1940, it would require some 2,000 aircraft to outfit the growing fleet, including those required for the new vessels planned under the current expansion program. 

The Congressional Appropriation Act for 1937 provided preliminary plans for two new battleships, and work on them began the following year. A similar act in 1938 provided for eight destroyers and four submarines, while by a special piece of legislation, at about the same time, Congress permitted the replacement of two overage battleships by new ones. The purpose of all this building, in line with the original provisos of the Trammel-Vinson Act, was to increase by 20 percent the under-age strength of the U.S. Navy.



*Naval Expansion Act of 1938*

In 1938 Congress passed President Roosevelt's Naval Expansion Act. This act called for across-the-board increases of 20 percent in the Navy's fleet strength. The aircraft inventory was likewise authorized to grow to a strength of not less than 3,000 planes by 1945. Of course all these new planes would require pilots and basing facilities, both of which were authorized in this important act. By this time, it had become clear to leadership in the Navy and in Congress that it was futile to attempt to expand naval aviation operations without a corresponding expansion of the infrastructure that was necessary to support them._

_Ship Building 1933-45 - Roosevelt, Franklin D._

The Yorktown and the Enterprise? _Any person who has read of WW2 knows the significance of the decision to build those ship_


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop lying.
> 
> *Roosevelt did nothing to prepare this nation for war until 1940.!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bald faced lie
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men*_
Click to expand...




That's a lie, as I have shown twice now.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Articulate the question ....so I can rip it to shreds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you want me to type slower?
> 
> You said it took FDR 7 years to begin to prepare for the war-
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Write a question that makes sense.
> 
> I recognize your fear that I will destroy what you write.....and I will.
Click to expand...


You said it took FDR 7 years to begin to prepare for the war-

Why exactly do you think that FDR should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop lying.
> 
> *Roosevelt did nothing to prepare this nation for war until 1940.!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bald faced lie
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a lie, as I have shown twice now.
Click to expand...


You refusing to believe the facts is just you refusing to believe the facts. 

Chapter 19: Between World Wars

_No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._

_Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*

To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_[


----------



## Syriusly

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup...Roosevelt was a devotee of Benitio Mussolini....he based his entire economic plan on Mussolini's.
> 
> 1. RexfordTugwell, FDR's economic guru,  was *opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in reality- FDR did not propose the nationalization of any industry.
> 
> You are delusional.
> 
> Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?
Click to expand...



Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?


----------



## Dot Com

Syriusly said:


> View attachment 57647
> 
> View attachment 57648
> 
> Oh- and who made the choice of George Marshall?
> 
> FDR



OUCH!!!  That had to leave a mark on PoliSpice


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
> "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country".
> 
> 
> 
> 2. "May 13, 1940 Marshall went to the White House with a budget proposal for $650- enough to fund an army of a million and a quarter soldiers. Roosevelt dismissed the proposal out of hand. Treasury Secretary Henry Morganthau asked that Marshall be allowed to state his case. The President brushed him off saying "I know exactly what he will say....there is no necessity of me hearing what he will say at all."
> *"Soldier, Statesman, Peacemaker: Leadership Lessons from George C. Marshall,"*
> By Jack Uldrich, p. 104
> 
> 3.  "Probably the step most noticed by the general public, and the most controversial one, was the beginning of a draft, compelling men into the armed services. This began in *August, 1940, after the war in Europe had been going on for a year.* It was the first peacetime draft in American history. The draft was to bring one million men into the service, mostly the army, for one year. In 1939, the US had the 21st largest army in the world, with only around 250,000 officers and men. This put US Army strength right behind Bulgaria." How did Roosevelt prepare for the inevitable entry into the war
> 
> 
> Two facts in evidence:
> a. you're a dunce
> b. I'm always 100% correct.
Click to expand...

Might check out the vote on that draft renewal, I have used it to illustrate Republican resistance to arming America. The House vote was 88 Republicans voting no, 46 voting  yes. It passed the House by one vote.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup...Roosevelt was a devotee of Benitio Mussolini....he based his entire economic plan on Mussolini's.
> 
> 1. RexfordTugwell, FDR's economic guru,  was *opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in reality- FDR did not propose the nationalization of any industry.
> 
> You are delusional.
> 
> Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?
Click to expand...




Exactly the sort of lie I love reducing you to!

Your defeat is acknowledged.


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is PC just a troll? Or truly a delusional Conservative?
> 
> Chapter 19: Between World Wars
> 
> _No quick changes in American military policy followed. *But beginning in 1935 the armed forces received substantially larger appropriations that permitted them to improve their readiness for action. *Army improvements during the next three years reflected not only the increasingly critical international situation but also the careful planning of the War Department during General Douglas MacArthur's tour as Chief of Staff from 1930 to 1935. His recommendations led to a reorganization of the combat forces and a modest increase in their size, and were accompanied by more realistic planning for using the manpower and industrial might of the United States for war, if that should become necessary._
> 
> _Immediately after the European war started the *President proclaimed a limited national emergency and authorized increases in Regular Army and National Guard enlisted strengths to 227,000and 235,000, respectively.*
> 
> To fill the ranks of this new Army, Congress on August 27 approved induction of the National Guard into federal service and the calling up of the Organized Reserves. *Then it approved the first peacetime draft of untrained civilian manpower in the nation's history, in the Selective Service and Training Act of September 14, 1940. *Units of the National Guard, and selectees and the Reserve officers to train them, entered service as rapidly as the Army could construct camps to house them. *During the last six months of 1940 the active Army more than doubled in strength, and by mid-1941 it achieved its planned strength of one and a half million officers and men.*_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So....was George Marshall lying, too?????
> 
> 1. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country".t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Google search: No such quote by George Marshall found
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stop revealing your lack of education.....learn to read a book
> 
> It is found here:
> 
> "*FDR Goes to War," *by Burton W. Folsom Jr. and Anita Folsom
Click to expand...

did you google that insult?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Here, another post that is absolutely true...and that the FDR apologists will be unable to deny....it clearly identifies the character of the man.



9. *Roosevelt swore to the American public the exact opposite of the truth: he declared that Stalin fought for the same ideals!
FDR was lying!*

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was*freedom of religion in the USSR. *"The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in*a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137





No freedom of the press, no freedom of religion, no capitalism, ex-post facto laws, extermination of political enemies.....
*America*

*Stalin fought for the same ideals as we did?????*

*
Or....the America that Franklin Roosevelt was planning for.



Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*


----------



## rightwinger

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cut and paste is the print version of video editing and distorting. It is only viable when the author can defend those challenges of distortion. You never seem able to defend your distortions when you are challenged. Your pattern is to ignore those challenges and flood the thread with new cut and paste to deflect away from the fact you have been caught in a lie of distortion. In this thread, I challenged your assessment that followed a cut and paste that FDR has not prepared the US Military for WWII. I had shown how you were distorting a quote by Gen. Marshall on numerous occasions, but you continue to use it. I debunked your assertion once again giving links to show how FDR was developing new modern weapons and preparing US industry to transform into the arsenal of freedom that it became on his command.
> You have failed to show you are not telling an indisputable lie about FDR not preparing for WWII. You haven't even attempted to defend that lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming- it just came about a year before we were really ready.
> 
> I believe almost every successful U.S. weapon deployed in WW2 was developed- and produced- during FDR's presidency- from the P-51 Mustang to the B-29 bomber.
> 
> Hell FDR approved the Manhattan project despite many of his generals not believing such a bomb could be possible.
> 
> PC just has a massive hate-on for FDR- from his rantings it appears to be based upon some John Birch anti-communist crap from the 1950's, with GOP malicious envy gossip added in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...here is a prime example of the sort of out-and-out lie that Leftist acolytes tell....and may even believe.
> 
> "FDR dragged the United States kicking and screaming into preparing our military for the war that was coming-..."
> 
> Due to ideology and ineptitude, he did the very opposite.
> 
> He made enemies of the business community-----which he hated because they were successful in an endeavor in which he regularly failed.
> 
> He was as clueless about the impending war as he was about those he idolized, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The armament industry, the so-called MIC, knew exactly what FDR was doing and they agreed with him with motivation and sincerity. Forts, bases, and air strips were being built and expanded through public works projects. They saw the massive plan to replace the weapons of the 20's and early 30's, most of which could not compete with the advanced weapons of Japan and Germany.
> No doubt PC has no concept to the time and process of development it took to replace America's weaponry for WWII. Nor does she have an inkling of knowledge of what is involved with retooling factories to produce those weapons.
> 
> FDR ordered the first attacks on Japan 13 days after Pearl Harbor with the attack on Japanese pilots and aircraft on Dec. 20 by the Flying Tigers who officially entered the China campaign with 39 P-40's which had been forward deployed as "volunteers". The effort to support the Chinese against Japan had been begun in August 1937.
> 
> Here is a very partial list of the over 160 projects named as "military" in the list of New Deal Projects.
> 
> Fort Knox Barracks 1935
> Fort Hamilton Improvements, Brooklyn, NY
> MARCH FIELD
> MITCHEL FIELD
> NAVEL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER. Bethesda, MD
> PORTLAND ARMY AIRBASE  Started 1936 and completed 1940.
> WINTER HARBOR NAVY BASE-MAINE
> Fort Simms Coast Guard Station
> US MARINE HOSPITAL-MEMPHIS TENNESEE 1935
> US Navel Magazine and Torpedo Factory-Alexandria, VA
> 
> This short list is only a handful of preparations the US was making under FDR's guidance and only include works done by New Deal relief agencies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm.....you declined to include the facts in the post....
> 
> ....must mean that they were all true, and had you shaking in your jammies.
> 
> 
> As I said....FDR was clueless about the impending war, and did not prepare the nation for same.
> 
> And he had been warned and advised repeatedly.
> 
> You've verified my post and revealed yourself to be a sniveling liar.
> 
> The usual denouement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every item I listed, from the Flying Tigers and Chennault to the list of military projects can be confirmed by simply typing what I referenced into a search of google, bing, etc. I have already listed links to some of the weapons developed such as the M-1 Garand, the B-17, P-38, ESSEX CLASS Carriers, etc.
> 
> What PC is unable to do, is to explain why the data I provided does not debunk her nonsense. That is because she doesn't really have a cut and paste method of refuting. She does not have the knowledge nor expertise to make an intellectual response because she is clueless about the topic she is trying to promote.
> 
> In reality, PC's response is sad and beyond lame. After obtaining a list of just a handful of the projects and programs put into motion by FDR, building, expanding and improving military bases, including huge airbases on both the west and east coast, developing training centers forts to train and house, increasing the size and capabilities of military hospitals, and the all-important development of the aircraft, ships and hardware need to win the war, the conspiracy theorist simply says none of that counts. She does so without a shred of evidence to contest that her nonsense has been debunked.
Click to expand...


You may as well talk to a wall

She will just ignore what you posted and cut and paste her original propaganda

Rinse/Repeat


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup...Roosevelt was a devotee of Benitio Mussolini....he based his entire economic plan on Mussolini's.
> 
> 1. RexfordTugwell, FDR's economic guru,  was *opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in reality- FDR did not propose the nationalization of any industry.
> 
> You are delusional.
> 
> Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you regret FDR leading the United States to victory in WW2- and emerging as the most powerful country in the world?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly the sort of lie I love reducing you to!
> 
> Your defeat is acknowledged.
Click to expand...


So you are glad that FDR led the United States to victory in WW2?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*



No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.

Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
Click to expand...




Have you admitted that you purposely made this post obtuse?

"Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?"


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
Click to expand...




Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?

*FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*

It is a fact, as are all of my posts.


Care to bet on it?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
Click to expand...




" FDR led the United States out of the Depression"

No he didn't.

He extended the Depression.

And, his adherence to Stalin's policies extended WWII, as well.

Only an uneducated, ignorant Roosevelt lap dog believes what you do.



1.  Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in _The National Experience, _in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

2.  In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”  article - AEI


----------



## PoliticalChic

*What did Roosevelt know, and when did he know it.....and what did he do with the knowledge?*


*He knew this:*



*10. "*The mass murder of seven million Ukrainians*, three million of them children*, and deportation to the gulag of two million more (where most died) was hidden by Soviet propaganda. Pro-communist westerners, like The New York Times' Walter Duranty, British writers Sidney and Beatrice Webb and French Prime Minister Edouard Herriot, toured Ukraine, denied reports of genocide, and applauded what they called Soviet "agrarian reform."

 Those who spoke out against the genocide were branded "fascist agents."   Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust - Eric Margolis



"...hidden by *Soviet propaganda."  Much of which came from the Roosevelt White House.*






Roosevelt didn't just overlook these atrocities.....he swore to America that they weren't true! Yet Liberals/Democrats meet these facts with a shrug, or the lie seen in post #: 429 'you must like Hitler!!!'

*FDR's lies and actions which served to cover and support Stalin's murderous regime *had to be the belief that, either, FDR was a devotee of communism and anticipated imposing it on America...or, that he believed that he could incorporate Stalin into an organization with himself as CEO.

The former explanation would represent illimitable evil.....the latter, abysmal ignorance.



Roosevelt knew of the Terror Famine, the Katyn Forest Massacre, and other blood purges. by Stalin.

Yet swore fealty to Stalin.


Why?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
Click to expand...


Prove it.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Yet swore fealty to Stalin.



And when exactly did FDR 'swear fealty to Stalin'?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 2. He became President in 1933, and rushed to embrace Stalin with recognition that same year....
> It took seven years to begin to prepare for the war..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you admitted that you purposely made this post obtuse?
> 
> "Why exactly do you think that HiItler should have been preparing for war with Hitler's Germany in 1933?"
Click to expand...

Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2


----------



## jillian

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
Click to expand...


she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
Click to expand...

It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends. That is far different that an outright allegation that the WWII American VP was an actual communist. 
No doubt you have a pre-designed cut and paste to continue this misinformation campaign of yours. That is how you will escape and deflect from the endless trashing you have already taken today. It's called changing the subject. So go ahead, tell us about our communist VP during WWII.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
Click to expand...



What are we betting.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet swore fealty to Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And when exactly did FDR 'swear fealty to Stalin'?
Click to expand...




When he broke every principle of the Founders to support Stalin.....to the detriment of America and American troops.


----------



## PoliticalChic

jillian said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
Click to expand...




Of course I can.....you know I'm never wrong.


How about you get in on the bet....put your Dinaro where you put your dinner.


Gutless?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
Click to expand...


Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet swore fealty to Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And when exactly did FDR 'swear fealty to Stalin'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When he broke every principle of the Founders to support Stalin.....to the detriment of America and American troops.
Click to expand...


And again- when exactly did FDR 'swear fealty to Stalin' as you claimed? 

Swearing fealty is a very specific act- prove it.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What are we betting.
Click to expand...


I am betting that you will never bother to respond to a post with an actual answer.


----------



## Unkotare

Syriusly said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> 
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- I can almost see the spittle on your monitor from your angst.
> 
> Absolutely no doubt that FDR worst decision- and blemish on America- was the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry- something that many Conservatives to this day insist was the right thing to do. Hell my grandmother- and most Americans- unfortunately- thought it was the right thing to do.
> 
> 'His spaghetti approach' to the economy? Worked- at least worked better than the absolutely nothing that Hoover had been doing.
> Unemployment went from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1941.
> You hate social security and unemployment insurance- most Americans are grateful for these programs that help Americans.
> "Sucking Stalin's" dick? That just shows you are an idiot.
> His infidelity to his wife? How does that change how he was as President- such infidelity is something he shared with Eisenhower, Clinton and of course GOP hopeful Donald Trump- something I don't approve of- but doesn't change any of their performances as President.
> The St. Louis? While I wish FDR had helped the passengers of the St. Louis- unlike the case of Japanese Americans, FDR was both following the law, and could argue that allowing the St. Louis passengers would have denied entry to thousands of German Jews who were in line to come into the U.S.
> _Quotas established in the US Immigration and Nationality Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted to the United States each year. In 1939, the annual combined German-Austrian immigration quota was 27,370 and was quickly filled. In fact, there was a waiting list of at least several years. US officials could only have granted visas to the St. Louis passengers by denying them to the thousands of German Jews placed further up on the waiting list._
> Campaign lies? _Oh no a Presidential campaign with lies.....getting pretty desperate to find something to attack FDR eh?_
> Attempting to pack the court? Stupid politically but what he proposed was not only legal- but had been proposed before.
> Running for a third and fourth term? Perfectly Constitutional- and the voters approved._ Why exactly are you upset that the voters chose FDR?_
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
Click to expand...







Look at how hard you have to work to play the shameless apologist.


----------



## Syriusly

Unkotare said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- I can almost see the spittle on your monitor from your angst.
> 
> Absolutely no doubt that FDR worst decision- and blemish on America- was the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry- something that many Conservatives to this day insist was the right thing to do. Hell my grandmother- and most Americans- unfortunately- thought it was the right thing to do.
> 
> 'His spaghetti approach' to the economy? Worked- at least worked better than the absolutely nothing that Hoover had been doing.
> Unemployment went from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1941.
> You hate social security and unemployment insurance- most Americans are grateful for these programs that help Americans.
> "Sucking Stalin's" dick? That just shows you are an idiot.
> His infidelity to his wife? How does that change how he was as President- such infidelity is something he shared with Eisenhower, Clinton and of course GOP hopeful Donald Trump- something I don't approve of- but doesn't change any of their performances as President.
> The St. Louis? While I wish FDR had helped the passengers of the St. Louis- unlike the case of Japanese Americans, FDR was both following the law, and could argue that allowing the St. Louis passengers would have denied entry to thousands of German Jews who were in line to come into the U.S.
> _Quotas established in the US Immigration and Nationality Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted to the United States each year. In 1939, the annual combined German-Austrian immigration quota was 27,370 and was quickly filled. In fact, there was a waiting list of at least several years. US officials could only have granted visas to the St. Louis passengers by denying them to the thousands of German Jews placed further up on the waiting list._
> Campaign lies? _Oh no a Presidential campaign with lies.....getting pretty desperate to find something to attack FDR eh?_
> Attempting to pack the court? Stupid politically but what he proposed was not only legal- but had been proposed before.
> Running for a third and fourth term? Perfectly Constitutional- and the voters approved._ Why exactly are you upset that the voters chose FDR?_
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at how hard you have to work to play the shameless apologist.
Click to expand...


Look at how you dodge to avoid having to deal with FDR's accomplishments

Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President

_From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
_At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
_At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
_At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
_While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
_At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
_Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
_Unemployment insurance was instituted_
_Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
_One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
Click to expand...



You're, lying.

You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.

Not possible.


Here comes your latest thrashing:

1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...

In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME



*"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."   

FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
*


----------



## PoliticalChic

jillian said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
Click to expand...




Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????


I love it!!!!


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What are we betting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am betting that you will never bother to respond to a post with an actual answer.
Click to expand...




Post # 455....

You lose again.



I almost feel sorry for you.

As a Liberal, you get no real education.
And....Liberalism is either the cause or the result of brain damage.



I said almost.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
Click to expand...

Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends. That is far different that an outright allegation that the WWII American VP was an actual communist.
> No doubt you have a pre-designed cut and paste to continue this misinformation campaign of yours. That is how you will escape and deflect from the endless trashing you have already taken today. It's called changing the subject. So go ahead, tell us about our communist VP during WWII.
Click to expand...




"It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends."


Don't, your hands hurt from holding on by a thread????

1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”* 
(Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)  

2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically  described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,

3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*.                      (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)

 The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


4.  *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev, _Haunted Woods_, p. 119)

5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.”                                     (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)



He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.

And....based on his overt actions.....
...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?



And about you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
Click to expand...




Liar.


Post #459, red-boy.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet swore fealty to Stalin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And when exactly did FDR 'swear fealty to Stalin'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When he broke every principle of the Founders to support Stalin.....to the detriment of America and American troops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again- when exactly did FDR 'swear fealty to Stalin' as you claimed?
> 
> Swearing fealty is a very specific act- prove it.
Click to expand...




His actions prove it, just as your posts prove you to be an uneducated indoctrinated stooge and lap dog for Roosevelt.


----------



## PoliticalChic

11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
 a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
 or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin. 
Nether comes close to the truth.

*Looking at the great tank battle of Kursk, or a study of Russia's 'three greatest generals, December, January, and February,' certainly don't support any claim that Stalin would have lost to Hitler.*

*So why did FDR bow to every single wish of Stalin's?????????*

*

a. What does history tell us about similar attempts to conquer the Russian bear?
"Napoleon began his invasion 550 miles from Moscow and 420 miles from St. Petersburg. Hitler began his invasion from a similar distance."Why Russia Is Marching mdash and Eastern Europe Is Afraid - theTrumpet.com*

* How did that turn out for the attackers?*



*.. when Operation Barbarossa started on June 22, 1941,the available (German) supplies of fuel, tires, spare parts etc., were only good enough for about two months.....

Stalin, in fact, had been supplying resources to Hitler.
*
*So.....find anything not true, correct, and accurate?*



*So....if the Allies didn't need Stalin......how to explain Roosevelt's vassal-like behavior toward Stalin?*


*How?*


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
Click to expand...


Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.

Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What are we betting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am betting that you will never bother to respond to a post with an actual answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post # 455....
> 
> You lose again.
> 
> 
> 
> I almost feel sorry for you.
> 
> As a Liberal, you get no real education.
> And....Liberalism is either the cause or the result of brain damage.
> 
> 
> 
> I said almost.
Click to expand...


You are delusional as always.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
Click to expand...




And get this irony, red-boy.....I've been to Roosevelt's home and to his library upstate New York, several times.

Know what building is attached to the FDR Library?

The Henry Wallace Library!!!!

Awsome, huh?


*Henry A Wallace Visitor Center*

We have today and tomorrow off so we are out exploring again.  Today we're visiting Franklin Delanor Roosevelt's home and Presidential Library.  The first stop, of course, is the Henry A. Wallace Visitor and Education Center in Hyde Park, New York. The home and the library are both of the same property as the Visitor Center.






Gypsies At Heart: Henry A Wallace Visitor Center


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends. That is far different that an outright allegation that the WWII American VP was an actual communist.
> No doubt you have a pre-designed cut and paste to continue this misinformation campaign of yours. That is how you will escape and deflect from the endless trashing you have already taken today. It's called changing the subject. So go ahead, tell us about our communist VP during WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends."
> 
> 
> Don't, your hands hurt from holding on by a thread????
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically  described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*.                      (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4.  *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev, _Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.”                                     (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> 
> And about you.
Click to expand...


So again- where is the actual proof that Wallace was a Communist?

Oh right- you pulled that out of your ass. 
Wallace never called himself a communist.
Wallace was never a member of the communist party.

As usual- you are just lying.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.
> 
> Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?
Click to expand...



"Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?"

So your latest defense is that you're too stupid to read????


Here is the post you linked to:
*FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.



You're the eternal loser, aren't you.*


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.



According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.

But I will humor you.

Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.

Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently. 

Go for it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Could explain why FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends. That is far different that an outright allegation that the WWII American VP was an actual communist.
> No doubt you have a pre-designed cut and paste to continue this misinformation campaign of yours. That is how you will escape and deflect from the endless trashing you have already taken today. It's called changing the subject. So go ahead, tell us about our communist VP during WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends."
> 
> 
> Don't, your hands hurt from holding on by a thread????
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically  described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*.                      (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4.  *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev, _Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.”                                     (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> 
> And about you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So again- where is the actual proof that Wallace was a Communist?
> 
> Oh right- you pulled that out of your ass.
> Wallace never called himself a communist.
> Wallace was never a member of the communist party.
> 
> As usual- you are just lying.
Click to expand...



Now, now.....
"Wallace never called himself a communist."
....you never called yourself an imbecile, but everyone knows you are.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.
> 
> Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So your latest defense is that you're too stupid to read????
> 
> 
> Here is the post you linked to:
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.
> .*
Click to expand...


And you just proved that you lied when you made that claim.

But then again you always lie.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one can explain any of your idiotic claims.
> 
> Tell us more about how you regret FDR led the United States out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends. That is far different that an outright allegation that the WWII American VP was an actual communist.
> No doubt you have a pre-designed cut and paste to continue this misinformation campaign of yours. That is how you will escape and deflect from the endless trashing you have already taken today. It's called changing the subject. So go ahead, tell us about our communist VP during WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends."
> 
> 
> Don't, your hands hurt from holding on by a thread????
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically  described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*.                      (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4.  *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev, _Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.”                                     (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> 
> And about you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So again- where is the actual proof that Wallace was a Communist?
> 
> Oh right- you pulled that out of your ass.
> Wallace never called himself a communist.
> Wallace was never a member of the communist party.
> 
> As usual- you are just lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Now, now.....
> "Wallace never called himself a communist."
> ....you never called yourself an imbecile, but everyone knows you are.
Click to expand...


You are what- 11 years old?

LOL......


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
Click to expand...

There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more. 
Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
You really are a joke PC.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
Click to expand...




Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!

*1*. What could, should have happened?
When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*

"Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.


2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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


3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*



BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to explain why this is 'idiotic'?
> 
> *FDR demanded a communist as his second vice-president....or he threatened not to run.*
> 
> It is a fact, as are all of my posts.
> 
> 
> Care to bet on it?
> 
> 
> 
> It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends. That is far different that an outright allegation that the WWII American VP was an actual communist.
> No doubt you have a pre-designed cut and paste to continue this misinformation campaign of yours. That is how you will escape and deflect from the endless trashing you have already taken today. It's called changing the subject. So go ahead, tell us about our communist VP during WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "It is not a fact that Wallace was a communist. It is an opinion that Wallace was overly sympathetic and influenced by his Russian wife and friends."
> 
> 
> Don't, your hands hurt from holding on by a thread????
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically  described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*.                      (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4.  *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev, _Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.”                                     (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> 
> 
> And about you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So again- where is the actual proof that Wallace was a Communist?
> 
> Oh right- you pulled that out of your ass.
> Wallace never called himself a communist.
> Wallace was never a member of the communist party.
> 
> As usual- you are just lying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Now, now.....
> "Wallace never called himself a communist."
> ....you never called yourself an imbecile, but everyone knows you are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are what- 11 years old?
> 
> LOL......
Click to expand...




Imagine that....an 11-year-old running rings around you.

Imagine, if you had the education that I had.......
Bet your folks warned you not to leave the third grade and join the circus, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
Click to expand...




"Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."

Liar.

1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
(Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)

2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,

3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)

The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)

5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)



He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.

And....based on his overt actions.....
...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Unkotare said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow- I can almost see the spittle on your monitor from your angst.
> 
> Absolutely no doubt that FDR worst decision- and blemish on America- was the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry- something that many Conservatives to this day insist was the right thing to do. Hell my grandmother- and most Americans- unfortunately- thought it was the right thing to do.
> 
> 'His spaghetti approach' to the economy? Worked- at least worked better than the absolutely nothing that Hoover had been doing.
> Unemployment went from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1941.
> You hate social security and unemployment insurance- most Americans are grateful for these programs that help Americans.
> "Sucking Stalin's" dick? That just shows you are an idiot.
> His infidelity to his wife? How does that change how he was as President- such infidelity is something he shared with Eisenhower, Clinton and of course GOP hopeful Donald Trump- something I don't approve of- but doesn't change any of their performances as President.
> The St. Louis? While I wish FDR had helped the passengers of the St. Louis- unlike the case of Japanese Americans, FDR was both following the law, and could argue that allowing the St. Louis passengers would have denied entry to thousands of German Jews who were in line to come into the U.S.
> _Quotas established in the US Immigration and Nationality Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted to the United States each year. In 1939, the annual combined German-Austrian immigration quota was 27,370 and was quickly filled. In fact, there was a waiting list of at least several years. US officials could only have granted visas to the St. Louis passengers by denying them to the thousands of German Jews placed further up on the waiting list._
> Campaign lies? _Oh no a Presidential campaign with lies.....getting pretty desperate to find something to attack FDR eh?_
> Attempting to pack the court? Stupid politically but what he proposed was not only legal- but had been proposed before.
> Running for a third and fourth term? Perfectly Constitutional- and the voters approved._ Why exactly are you upset that the voters chose FDR?_
> 
> Now- let us review what FDR did accomplish while President
> 
> _From the time he was elected- to the time he died- unemployment went from 25% to virtually zero._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by several factors- the most powerful economy in the world._
> _At the time of his death- the United States was by large measure had the most powerful industry in the United States._
> _At the time of his death- the United States had the most powerful Navy and air force in the world_
> _While he was President- every 'modern' weapon system used by the U.S. in WW2 was developed- from the P-51 to the B-29- to the atomic bomb. _
> _At the time of his death- the United States was on the verge of victory against the two remaining countries the United States was at war with- Italy had already been defeated._
> _Social Security was implemented- the primary retirement funding for most Americans today_
> _Unemployment insurance was instituted_
> _Bank Depositors insurance was instituted_
> _One of the most radical programs was instituted- the GI Bill- which was one of the key programs that fueled American prosperity and growth in the 1950's. _
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at how hard you have to work to play the shameless apologist.
Click to expand...




It's almost surprising how indelible the indoctrination is.
Even when proof is provided, the words of those who lived during the era, and noting events that prove the reality.....
....the simpletons maintain their mindless affection for Roosevelt.

As a wise wonk stated:
'Let's be honest, for a Liberal, not data, facts, proof, or even experience will matter a bit in informing belief.'


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
Click to expand...

You just keep posting the same cut and paste that leads you to the personal opinion that deep down inside, Wallace may have been a person who believed in communism, but that is just your personal opinion based on your selective speculation. What you are doing is insisting that your opinion is accepted as factual reality. Unless you can provide evidence that Wallace was a member of the communist party, you can not claim your opinion to be a fact. You can not put this opinion in history books as fact. American never had a sitting communist Vice President.


----------



## Camp

Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York and a still lively legacy of accomplishments  while Reagan has half an airport name and some street statues in eastern Europe and a legacy as a shared one hit wonder, maybe.


----------



## Dot Com

How many criminal convictions in the Gipper's Admin OP?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*u.
Click to expand...


Okay- lets continue with that

Okay on 6/21/41- you say we should have done nothing- except relax restrictions- but exacted a quid-pro- quo for 'Lend Lease"


Should we have provided some form of Lend Lease- but with quid- pro- quo?
IF yes- what is the quid-pro-quo that FDR should have demanded.
IF the United States did not provide Lend Lease- what would that effect have been on the war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
Click to expand...


And again- where in all of that Conspiracy crap- is there 'proof' that Henry Wallace was a communist?

Once again- just you pulling crap out of your ass.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again- where in all of that Conspiracy crap- is there 'proof' that Henry Wallace was a communist?
> 
> Once again- just you pulling crap out of your ass.
Click to expand...



Vulgarity.....the Liberal white flag.


*"Wallace would have created an American foreign policy run by Soviet agents* he had installed in the White House, including Lauchlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, his former assistant at Commerce, and the secret Communist and Soviet agent Harry Magdof, who wrote Wallace’s Madison Square Garden speech in 1946 . . . all of whom *would have given Joseph Stalin precisely what he sought: *control of Eastern Europe and inroads into subversion of France, Italy, and Great Britain as well. 

*The result would have been a deepening of Stalinist control *of Europe, and a tough road that might well have made it impossible for the West actually to have won the Cold War and to have defeated Soviet expansionism. Moreover, as Gaddis suggests, *new evidence has emerged that points to just how much Wallace was under the control of the Soviets, and how they were counting on him as the man in the United States best suited to serve their ends.*
The Real Henry Wallace, by Conrad Black, National Review



Wise up, you dope.


----------



## PoliticalChic

*
 12. While there may be some question as to what the exact relaitonshiop between Stalin and Roosevelt was, there can be no argument that  Stalin got exactly what he wanted from Franklin Roosevelt.

a. The attack at Normandy, instead of the Adriatic

b. Lend-Lease poured into Russia at the expense of Allied requirements (included uranium for a bomb).

c. An international socialist institution, the United Nations, where Russia got 3 votes to the US's single one. And a Soviet agent as first sec'y general.

d. Hegemony and control of all of Eastern Europe

e. Crushing of Germany, which might have stood in Stalin's way, following Stalin's order to Roosevelt never to allow surrender by anti-Nazi and anti-Communist Germans.



And....over 20,000 United States soldiers were captured and never returned by the USSR.
So.....who won WWII?

*
*The import of the thread....Franklin Roosevelt was the very opposite of the greatest President in the last 100 year.....Ronald Reagan.*


*Franklin Roosevelt....the Un-Reagan.*


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again- where in all of that Conspiracy crap- is there 'proof' that Henry Wallace was a communist?
> 
> Once again- just you pulling crap out of your ass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Vulgarity.....the Liberal white flag.
> 
> 
> *"Wallace would have created an American foreign policy run by Soviet agents* he had installed in the White House, including Lauchlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, his former assistant at Commerce, and the secret Communist and Soviet agent Harry Magdof, who wrote Wallace’s Madison Square Garden speech in 1946 . . . all of whom *would have given Joseph Stalin precisely what he sought: *control of Eastern Europe and inroads into subversion of France, Italy, and Great Britain as well.
> 
> *The result would have been a deepening of Stalinist control *of Europe, and a tough road that might well have made it impossible for the West actually to have won the Cold War and to have defeated Soviet expansionism. Moreover, as Gaddis suggests, *new evidence has emerged that points to just how much Wallace was under the control of the Soviets, and how they were counting on him as the man in the United States best suited to serve their ends.*
> The Real Henry Wallace, by Conrad Black, National Review
> 
> 
> 
> Wise up, you dope.
Click to expand...


Again- waiting for you to actually prove one of the things you have posted- prove that FDR insisted on having a communist as VP.

Still waiting.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> * 12. While there may be some question as to what the exact relaitonshiop between Stalin and Roosevelt was, there can be no argument that  Stalin got exactly what he wanted from Franklin Roosevelt.**.*



Why exactly did Stalin want the United States to be the most powerful country in the world in 1945?

Why exactly did Stalin want the United States to have the powerful industry in the world in 1945?

Who won?

Well in 2015, the United States is still the most powerful nation in the world- and the Soviet Union no longer exists.

Well done FDR.


----------



## Camp

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again- where in all of that Conspiracy crap- is there 'proof' that Henry Wallace was a communist?
> 
> Once again- just you pulling crap out of your ass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Vulgarity.....the Liberal white flag.
> 
> 
> *"Wallace would have created an American foreign policy run by Soviet agents* he had installed in the White House, including Lauchlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, his former assistant at Commerce, and the secret Communist and Soviet agent Harry Magdof, who wrote Wallace’s Madison Square Garden speech in 1946 . . . all of whom *would have given Joseph Stalin precisely what he sought: *control of Eastern Europe and inroads into subversion of France, Italy, and Great Britain as well.
> 
> *The result would have been a deepening of Stalinist control *of Europe, and a tough road that might well have made it impossible for the West actually to have won the Cold War and to have defeated Soviet expansionism. Moreover, as Gaddis suggests, *new evidence has emerged that points to just how much Wallace was under the control of the Soviets, and how they were counting on him as the man in the United States best suited to serve their ends.*
> The Real Henry Wallace, by Conrad Black, National Review
> 
> 
> 
> Wise up, you dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again- waiting for you to actually prove one of the things you have posted- prove that FDR insisted on having a communist as VP.
> 
> Still waiting.
Click to expand...

She will fall asleep at her keyboard, wake up and repeat her cycle of lying instead of admitting a mistake. That is because her claims are not mistakes, they are purposeful lies and efforts at disinformation.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again- where in all of that Conspiracy crap- is there 'proof' that Henry Wallace was a communist?
> 
> Once again- just you pulling crap out of your ass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Vulgarity.....the Liberal white flag.
> 
> 
> *"Wallace would have created an American foreign policy run by Soviet agents* he had installed in the White House, including Lauchlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, his former assistant at Commerce, and the secret Communist and Soviet agent Harry Magdof, who wrote Wallace’s Madison Square Garden speech in 1946 . . . all of whom *would have given Joseph Stalin precisely what he sought: *control of Eastern Europe and inroads into subversion of France, Italy, and Great Britain as well.
> 
> *The result would have been a deepening of Stalinist control *of Europe, and a tough road that might well have made it impossible for the West actually to have won the Cold War and to have defeated Soviet expansionism. Moreover, as Gaddis suggests, *new evidence has emerged that points to just how much Wallace was under the control of the Soviets, and how they were counting on him as the man in the United States best suited to serve their ends.*
> The Real Henry Wallace, by Conrad Black, National Review
> 
> 
> 
> Wise up, you dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again- waiting for you to actually prove one of the things you have posted- prove that FDR insisted on having a communist as VP.
> 
> Still waiting.
Click to expand...




OMG!

An 'is not, is noootttttttt' post from a Liberals!


Shocker.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
Click to expand...


Doesn't look so good for Wallace.


----------



## Syriusly

Yeah- PC can't even follow a conversation without reverting to your volumes of previous cut and pastes.

Why exactly did Stalin want the United States to be the most powerful country in the world in 1945?

Why exactly did Stalin want the United States to have the powerful industry in the world in 1945?

Who won?

Well in 2015, the United States is still the most powerful nation in the world- and the Soviet Union no longer exists.

Well done FDR.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post #455 smashed another custard pie in your kisser, huh????
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing in Post #455 gives a shred of evidence or support to your claim that VP Wallace was a communist. You made the claim, but you can not substantiate it. Not even a close try. You called the VP a communist and accused FDR of insisting on a communist VP.  That is a lie. You told the story. If you persist in sticking to it you confirm yourself as a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #459, red-boy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't look so good for Wallace.
Click to expand...


I think he will never get elected President.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in you additional Post #459 that confirms Wallace as a communist and certainly not as a sitting VP communist. You are giving speculation and opinion, nothing more.
> Lets have some perspective. You started out claiming FDR had a communist for a sitting Vice President. Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim, you are stretching your speculative theory out to years after his Vice Presidency was over and he was selected by the Progressive party as a Presidential candidate. The Progressives got an endorsement from the communist party. Hence you have concluded that America had a communist for a WWII VP.
> You really are a joke PC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Unable to show a shred of evidence to support your outrageous claim,...."
> 
> Liar.
> 
> 1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
> (Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)
> 
> 2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,
> 
> 3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)
> 
> 5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
> 
> 6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
> 
> And....based on his overt actions.....
> ...what does that say about Comrade Roosevelt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again- where in all of that Conspiracy crap- is there 'proof' that Henry Wallace was a communist?
> 
> Once again- just you pulling crap out of your ass.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Vulgarity.....the Liberal white flag.
> 
> 
> *"Wallace would have created an American foreign policy run by Soviet agents* he had installed in the White House, including Lauchlin Currie, Harry Dexter White, his former assistant at Commerce, and the secret Communist and Soviet agent Harry Magdof, who wrote Wallace’s Madison Square Garden speech in 1946 . . . all of whom *would have given Joseph Stalin precisely what he sought: *control of Eastern Europe and inroads into subversion of France, Italy, and Great Britain as well.
> 
> *The result would have been a deepening of Stalinist control *of Europe, and a tough road that might well have made it impossible for the West actually to have won the Cold War and to have defeated Soviet expansionism. Moreover, as Gaddis suggests, *new evidence has emerged that points to just how much Wallace was under the control of the Soviets, and how they were counting on him as the man in the United States best suited to serve their ends.*
> The Real Henry Wallace, by Conrad Black, National Review
> 
> 
> 
> Wise up, you dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again- waiting for you to actually prove one of the things you have posted- prove that FDR insisted on having a communist as VP.
> 
> Still waiting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG!
> 
> An 'is not, is noootttttttt' post from a Liberals!
> 
> 
> Shocker.
Click to expand...


Again- waiting for you to actually prove one of the things you have posted- prove that FDR insisted on having a communist as VP.

Still waiting.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
Click to expand...


But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?

And the double standard is pretty clear on this.

I don't agree with you on several points. 

As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.

But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof". 

Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".

And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).

So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.

I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.

I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.


----------



## Dot Com

^ The guy who posts unsourced opinions is back!!! YAY!!!


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
Click to expand...


And I appreciate your posts- even when you are wrong. 

Like in this thread.  I have enjoyed watching PC's fellow travelers and their efforts to explain how terrible that FDR left the United States the most powerful nation- and economy- in the world at his death.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And I appreciate your posts- even when you are wrong.
> 
> Like in this thread.  I have enjoyed watching PC's fellow travelers and their efforts to explain how terrible that FDR left the United States the most powerful nation- and economy- in the world at his death.
Click to expand...


So sad you have no idea what is right and what is wrong.

Maybe Santa will bring you a working brain for Christmas.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> ^ The guy who posts unsourced opinions is back!!! YAY!!!



Unsourced opinions ????

Now that's funny.


----------



## Dot Com

using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him


----------



## Camp

While securing the creation of the most powerful and richest country in world history, FDR built infrastructure that continues to serve the public to this very day.  This holiday weekend, 80 years and more after he began the New Deal work projects, paid for with public loans and paid back by workers returning from WWII, citizens will travel over bridges, highways and tunnels originally built during his administration. They will send and  receive cards and packages that will flow through postal facilities built during his era, including hundreds of little post offices in small town America. We have one of those Post Office facilities in my town. A small little brick building with concrete and white painted wood trim. Classical little American hometown post office. Built by people with great pride and thanks for the jobs they were given during the Great Depression.


----------



## Jroc

Camp said:


> While securing the creation of the most powerful and richest country in world history, FDR built infrastructure that continues to serve the public to this very day.  This holiday weekend, 80 years and more after he began the New Deal work projects, paid for with public loans and paid back by workers returning from WWII, citizens will travel over bridges, highways and tunnels originally built during his administration. They will send and  receive cards and packages that will flow through postal facilities built during his era, including hundreds of little post offices in small town America. We have one of those Post Office facilities in my town. A small little brick building with concrete and white painted wood trim. Classical little American hometown post office. Built by people with great pride and thanks for the jobs they were given during the Great Depression.




The post office is loosing billions, and Social security is unsustainable. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Cut government, cut the bureaucracy, shrink the size of government. Our infrastructure would be in much better shape, if we used all that money supporting the leftist's big government, bureaucracy to improve it and repair it 

Reagan the Un- Roosevelt


----------



## Unkotare

Camp said:


> Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York .....




More logical fallacy.


----------



## Camp

Jroc said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> While securing the creation of the most powerful and richest country in world history, FDR built infrastructure that continues to serve the public to this very day.  This holiday weekend, 80 years and more after he began the New Deal work projects, paid for with public loans and paid back by workers returning from WWII, citizens will travel over bridges, highways and tunnels originally built during his administration. They will send and  receive cards and packages that will flow through postal facilities built during his era, including hundreds of little post offices in small town America. We have one of those Post Office facilities in my town. A small little brick building with concrete and white painted wood trim. Classical little American hometown post office. Built by people with great pride and thanks for the jobs they were given during the Great Depression.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The post office is loosing billions, and Social security is unsustainable. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Cut government, cut the bureaucracy, shrink the size of government. Our infrastructure would be in much better shape, if we used all that money supporting the leftist's big government, bureaucracy to improve it and repair it
> 
> Reagan the Un- Roosevelt
Click to expand...

The Post Office is not losing money from the facilities bought and paid for almost a century ago. If somewhere along the line between the 1930's and the present day someone has mismanaged, abused or corrupted the systems oR programs that FDR created in the 30's and 40's it is unfair to blame him. He died in 1945. Reagan decided to save Social Security in the 80's. Whose fault is it that in needs another tune-up 30 or 40 years after Reagan gave it one?
Part of the FDR greatness was the way he financed all that infrastructure. He used genius to finance those projects and pay for them. He devised a way for small government, specifically states, to borrow funds, select projects and pay for the loans with state funds garnered from taxes after WWII.


----------



## Camp

Unkotare said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More logical fallacy.
Click to expand...

No, proof that money talks and bullshit walks.  FDR Memorials were financed privately with citizen support and the same has not yet been available for a Reagan legacy. FDR got an island in New York and Reagan got a sidewalk statue in front of the US Embassy in Poland.


----------



## Unkotare

Camp said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, proof that money talks and bullshit walks.  ......
Click to expand...



Logical fallacy, you dope.


----------



## Camp

Unkotare said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, proof that money talks and bullshit walks.  ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Logical fallacy, you dope.
Click to expand...

What is it with you miserable people that have constant needs to call other people names? Do you not realize it is like a flashing sign that gives away your insecurities and lack of emotional strength or confident ego? What possible gratification could you get from calling an unknown anonymous person on a message board a dope? Why would you think it had any meaning?


----------



## Unkotare

Camp said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, proof that money talks and bullshit walks.  ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Logical fallacy, you dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is it with you miserable people that have constant needs to call other people names? Do you not realize it is like a flashing sign that gives away your insecurities and lack of emotional strength or confident ego? What possible gratification could you get from calling an unknown anonymous person on a message board a dope? Why would you think it had any meaning?
Click to expand...



Stop being a dope anytime it gets too traumatic for you to hear the truth about yourself, dope.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And I appreciate your posts- even when you are wrong.
> 
> Like in this thread.  I have enjoyed watching PC's fellow travelers and their efforts to explain how terrible that FDR left the United States the most powerful nation- and economy- in the world at his death.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So sad you have no idea what is right and what is wrong.
> 
> Maybe Santa will bring you a working brain for Christmas.
Click to expand...


Ah thats so sweet....you still believe in Santa.....


----------



## Syriusly

Jroc said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> While securing the creation of the most powerful and richest country in world history, FDR built infrastructure that continues to serve the public to this very day.  This holiday weekend, 80 years and more after he began the New Deal work projects, paid for with public loans and paid back by workers returning from WWII, citizens will travel over bridges, highways and tunnels originally built during his administration. They will send and  receive cards and packages that will flow through postal facilities built during his era, including hundreds of little post offices in small town America. We have one of those Post Office facilities in my town. A small little brick building with concrete and white painted wood trim. Classical little American hometown post office. Built by people with great pride and thanks for the jobs they were given during the Great Depression.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The post office is loosing billions, and Social security is unsustainable.A]
Click to expand...


The Post office losing money? How could that be possible? Technology has remained constant since 1860 hasn't it?

I understand that many of you hate FDR for implementing Social Security- which the majority of retirees in America depend on.

Social security may be flawed- but with no FDR- under Hoover's guidance- there was nothing- no social security- no safety net for old people.


----------



## Syriusly

I really want to hear more about how terrible FDR was.

I acknowledge his most egregious and tragic decision- Japanese internment- something many Conservatives to this day applaud.

But the facts are very, very clear.

FDR was elected as the country was in a Depression with 25% unemployment, and a third or fourth rate military- and died as President- massively popular- with virtually no unemployment, with the United States being the most powerful country in the world, with the most powerful military in the world.

Please explain why all of that offends you?


----------



## Jroc

Syriusly said:


> I really want to hear more about how terrible FDR was.
> 
> I acknowledge his most egregious and tragic decision- Japanese internment- something many Conservatives to this day applaud.
> 
> But the facts are very, very clear.
> 
> FDR was elected as the country was in a Depression with 25% unemployment, and a third or fourth rate military- and died as President- massively popular- with virtually no unemployment, with the United States being the most powerful country in the world, with the most powerful military in the world.
> 
> Please explain why all of that offends you?




FDR extended the depression. He didn't pull us out of anything



> Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
> 
> After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.
> 
> "Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."


http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409





> Far from pulling the country out of the Great Depression by following Keynesian policies, FDR created policies that prolonged the depression until it was more than twice as long as any other depression in American history. Moreover, Roosevelt's ad hoc improvisations followed nothing as coherent as Keynesian economics.
> 
> To the extent that FDR followed the ideas of any economist, it was an obscure economist at the University of Wisconsin, who was disdained by other economists and who was regarded with contempt by John Maynard Keynes.
> 
> President Roosevelt's strong suit was politics, not economics. He played the political game both cleverly and ruthlessly, including using both the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service to harass and intimidate his critics and opponents.
> 
> It is not a pretty story. But we need to understand it if we want to avoid the ugly consequences of very similar policies today.



THOMAS SOWELL: FDR’s policies prolonged Great Depression


----------



## Syriusly

Jroc said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really want to hear more about how terrible FDR was.
> 
> I acknowledge his most egregious and tragic decision- Japanese internment- something many Conservatives to this day applaud.
> 
> But the facts are very, very clear.
> 
> FDR was elected as the country was in a Depression with 25% unemployment, and a third or fourth rate military- and died as President- massively popular- with virtually no unemployment, with the United States being the most powerful country in the world, with the most powerful military in the world.
> 
> Please explain why all of that offends you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended the depression. He didn't pull us out of anything
Click to expand...


The fact is that when FDR came into office- unemployment was 25%- by 1940- it was down to 9%.
The fact is that when FDR died- the United States had gone from our countries worse depression to being the undisputed most powerful country in the world- the most powerful military and the most powerful economy.

And led us to victory over Japan, Germany and Italy. 

Those are the facts. None of Hoover's efforts had done anything to change the direction the economy was going.

And he left us with:
Social Security
Unemployment Insurance
Bank Depositors Insurance.

Did FDR's policies prolong the Depression- perhaps- 2 or 3 economists believe he did. Many others believe he brought the country out of the Depression- there is no way to be sure- but we are sure what did happen.


----------



## Syriusly

Jroc said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really want to hear more about how terrible FDR was.
> 
> I acknowledge his most egregious and tragic decision- Japanese internment- something many Conservatives to this day applaud.
> 
> But the facts are very, very clear.
> 
> FDR was elected as the country was in a Depression with 25% unemployment, and a third or fourth rate military- and died as President- massively popular- with virtually no unemployment, with the United States being the most powerful country in the world, with the most powerful military in the world.
> 
> Please explain why all of that offends you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended the depression. He didn't pull us out of anything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
> 
> After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.
> 
> "Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Far from pulling the country out of the Great Depression by following Keynesian policies, FDR created policies that prolonged the depression until it was more than twice as long as any other depression in American history. Moreover, Roosevelt's ad hoc improvisations followed nothing as coherent as Keynesian economics.
> 
> To the extent that FDR followed the ideas of any economist, it was an obscure economist at the University of Wisconsin, who was disdained by other economists and who was regarded with contempt by John Maynard Keynes.
> 
> President Roosevelt's strong suit was politics, not economics. He played the political game both cleverly and ruthlessly, including using both the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service to harass and intimidate his critics and opponents.
> 
> It is not a pretty story. But we need to understand it if we want to avoid the ugly consequences of very similar policies today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> THOMAS SOWELL: FDR’s policies prolonged Great Depression
Click to expand...


The right-wing New Deal conniption fit

_The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America, and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York’s Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown.


It also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800 bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers, rebuilt the country’s entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians, sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock.




In other words, millions of men and women earned a living wage and self-respect and contributed mightily to the national infrastructure. But, according to the statistics as interpreted on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, they were unemployed.

Way back in 1976, economist Michael Darby exposed the absurdity of not counting WPA workers as “employed” in his paper “Three-and-a-Half Million U.S. Employees Have Been Mislaid: Or, an Explanation of Unemployment, 1934-1941.” More than 30 years ago, Darby observed that correctly counting those 3 and a half million people as employed workers effectively debunked “the ‘un-fact’ that recovery was extremely slow from 1934 through 1941. From 1933 to 1936, the corrected unemployment rate fell by nearly 5 percentage points per year…”
The bottom line conservative position on the New Deal is that, theoretically speaking, the economy would have returned to “normal” more quickly if FDR had refrained from interfering with the workings of the free market through his vast array of interventionist programs. Sadly for them, we never got a chance to find out, because the situation in 1933, when Roosevelt took office, demanded government action. Twenty-five percent of the nation was unemployed. Human suffering was immense. If the market had been left to work its problems out all by itself, further suffering in the near term would have been unimaginable. And not just unimaginable — but also politically unacceptable.



If the New Deal actually extended the Great Depression, we might wonder, why was Roosevelt reelected three times? One explanation would be that the general public is an idiot, and I must confess, I’ve leaned toward that point of view myself after viewing the aftermath of Election Day in the U.S. on a number of occasions over the last three decades. But another explanation could be that a majority of voters experienced material improvements in the quality of their lives as a result of New Deal programs. This is a point of enduring frustration to conservatives, and they’ve expended vast effort over the years in their attempt to rewrite history and convince us that what our grandparents knew was wrong — to the point that they’ve even tried to tell us that the people who built the fantastic Art Deco structures at the high school my daughter is currently attending were “unemployed.”

I do not think those workers would have agreed._


----------



## Jroc

Syriusly said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really want to hear more about how terrible FDR was.
> 
> I acknowledge his most egregious and tragic decision- Japanese internment- something many Conservatives to this day applaud.
> 
> But the facts are very, very clear.
> 
> FDR was elected as the country was in a Depression with 25% unemployment, and a third or fourth rate military- and died as President- massively popular- with virtually no unemployment, with the United States being the most powerful country in the world, with the most powerful military in the world.
> 
> Please explain why all of that offends you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended the depression. He didn't pull us out of anything
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The fact is that when FDR came into office- unemployment was 25%- by 1940- it was down to 9%.
> The fact is that when FDR died- the United States had gone from our countries worse depression to being the undisputed most powerful country in the world- the most powerful military and the most powerful economy.
> 
> And led us to victory over Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Those are the facts. None of Hoover's efforts had done anything to change the direction the economy was going.
> 
> And he left us with:
> Social Security
> Unemployment Insurance
> Bank Depositors Insurance.
> 
> Did FDR's policies prolong the Depression- perhaps- 2 or 3 economists believe he did. Many others believe he brought the country out of the Depression- there is no way to be sure- but we are sure what did happen.
Click to expand...


Roosevelt's policies had nothing to do with ending the depression ..



> What about World War II? We need to understand that the near-full employment during the conflict was temporary. Ten million to 12 million soldiers overseas and another 10 million to 15 million people making tanks, bullets and war materiel do not a lasting recovery make. The country essentially traded temporary jobs for a skyrocketing national debt. Many of those jobs had little or no value after the war.
> 
> No one knew this more than FDR himself. His key advisers were frantic at the possibility of the Great Depression's return when the war ended and the soldiers came home. The president believed a New Deal revival was the answer—and on Oct. 28, 1944, about six months before his death, he spelled out his vision for a postwar America. It included government-subsidized housing, federal involvement in health care, more TVA projects, and the "right to a useful and remunerative job" provided by the federal government if necessary.
> 
> Roosevelt died before the war ended and before he could implement his New Deal revival.






> *Corporate tax rates were trimmed and FDR's "excess profits" tax was repealed, which meant that top marginal corporate tax rates effectively went to 38% from 90% after 1945.*
> 
> Georgia Sen. Walter George, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, defended the Revenue Act of 1945 with arguments that today we would call "supply-side economics." If the tax bill "has the effect which it is hoped it will have," George said, "it will so stimulate the expansion of business as to bring in a greater total revenue."
> 
> He was prophetic. By the late 1940s, a revived economy was generating more annual federal revenue than the U.S. had received during the war years, when tax rates were higher. Price controls from the war were also eliminated by the end of 1946. The U.S. began running budget surpluses.
> 
> Congress substituted the tonic of freedom for FDR's New Deal revival and the American economy recovered well. Unemployment, which had been in double digits throughout the 1930s, was only 3.9% in 1946 and, except for a couple of short recessions, remained in that range for the next decade.





> *The Great Depression was over, no thanks to FDR. Yet the myth of his New Deal lives on. With the current effort by President Obama to emulate some of FDR's programs to get us out of the recent deep recession, this myth should be laid to rest.*



Did FDR End the Depression?


----------



## regent

There are so many facets to the time of FDR that we fail to remember, one was the families that were able to stay together because of a public works job. During the Hoover period fathers left home and their families because they were a drain on the spotty income a family might have. Children also left home for the same reason and many kids rode the rails, looking for work. One of the first FDR programs was to get the kids off the road. This was accomplished by the CCC's. A CCC member got thirty bucks a month and if he sent the thirty home he was given five bucks for his very own. Most sent the money home. The military ran the camps and most would end up in WWII. For the fathers there was the WPA and PWA I think they got eleven dollars a week and as mentioned built and rebuilt so much of America today. Hoover's answer had been to loan business and manufacturers money to build products that weren't selling and sat on warehouse shelves.


----------



## Camp

Unkotare said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meantime, FDR has major Memorials in two  cities, Washington DC and New York .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More logical fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, proof that money talks and bullshit walks.  ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Logical fallacy, you dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is it with you miserable people that have constant needs to call other people names? Do you not realize it is like a flashing sign that gives away your insecurities and lack of emotional strength or confident ego? What possible gratification could you get from calling an unknown anonymous person on a message board a dope? Why would you think it had any meaning?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being a dope anytime it gets too traumatic for you to hear the truth about yourself, dope.
Click to expand...

Sorry you have to live such a miserable angry life. Try to find some happiness somewhere.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
Click to expand...




If one supports the aims and methods of the communists....said person is a communist.


Later in life, Wallace recanted....he actually wrote an apology for support of the above.

By every realpolitik metric, Wallace was a communist,and would have aided them in their every endeavor.



See the following, a letter of apology by Wallace:

"Up to a point, my analysis was sound, but it failed utterly to take into account the ruthless nature of Russian-trained Communists whose sole objective was to make Czechoslovakia completely subservient to Moscow.


Today, knowing more about Russia's methods, I am sure it was a serious mistake when we withdrew our troops. Russia may not want a hot war at tang time in the net ten years, but she certainly wants such a continuation of the Col War as will enable her, through her satellites and internally-planted subversives, to take over the greatest amount of territory possible. Russia is still on the march, and the question now is whether she will be able to take over all of Asia, including India and the Near East."
Henry A. Wallace (1952) on the Ruthless Nature and Utter Evil of Soviet Communism: Cold-War Era God-That-Failed Weblogging


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him



Please show us the last post where you used a source.


----------



## PoliticalChic

To Review:

Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....

....and...

..Franklin Delano Roosevelt threatened the Democrat Party that he would not run, he actually had written a speech declining the nomination, if Wallace was not chosen to replace Garner.


That is an important element in the calculation when one considers the kneel-before-Stalin policies of Roosevelt.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

PoliticalChic said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If one supports the aims and methods of the communists....said person is a communist.
> 
> 
> Later in life, Wallace recanted....he actually wrote an apology for support of the above.
> 
> By every realpolitik metric, Wallace was a communist,and would have aided them in their every endeavor.
> 
> 
> 
> See the following, a letter of apology by Wallace:
> 
> "Up to a point, my analysis was sound, but it failed utterly to take into account the ruthless nature of Russian-trained Communists whose sole objective was to make Czechoslovakia completely subservient to Moscow.
> 
> 
> Today, knowing more about Russia's methods, I am sure it was a serious mistake when we withdrew our troops. Russia may not want a hot war at tang time in the net ten years, but she certainly wants such a continuation of the Col War as will enable her, through her satellites and internally-planted subversives, to take over the greatest amount of territory possible. Russia is still on the march, and the question now is whether she will be able to take over all of Asia, including India and the Near East."
> Henry A. Wallace (1952) on the Ruthless Nature and Utter Evil of Soviet Communism: Cold-War Era God-That-Failed Weblogging
Click to expand...


And that's my point.  

As you've said...if it walks like a duck.....

Wallace apparently was a big advocate of things like universal health care.  He had concerns for the fact that people did not have the basics.

Most socialists I know start out as ideologues.  But the realities of human nature just seem to get in the way.

And his admission is as close as you'll get....but those who scream about how it is so bloody "clear" that Obama saved us from a great depression (all speculation) won't accept your assertions without bloodwritten proof.  

It's no longer about the politics....it's about them being to stupid and stubborn to admit they are wrong.

Look at Dot Com's constant bleating (generally one line turds)....what proof has he provided on anything ?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 11. And....never overlook the propaganda lie that either
> a) we needed Stalin to defeat Hitler,
> or b) without Roosevelt, Hitler would have beaten Stalin.
> Nether comes close to the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If one supports the aims and methods of the communists....said person is a communist.
> 
> 
> Later in life, Wallace recanted....he actually wrote an apology for support of the above.
> 
> By every realpolitik metric, Wallace was a communist,and would have aided them in their every endeavor.
> 
> 
> 
> See the following, a letter of apology by Wallace:
> 
> "Up to a point, my analysis was sound, but it failed utterly to take into account the ruthless nature of Russian-trained Communists whose sole objective was to make Czechoslovakia completely subservient to Moscow.
> 
> 
> Today, knowing more about Russia's methods, I am sure it was a serious mistake when we withdrew our troops. Russia may not want a hot war at tang time in the net ten years, but she certainly wants such a continuation of the Col War as will enable her, through her satellites and internally-planted subversives, to take over the greatest amount of territory possible. Russia is still on the march, and the question now is whether she will be able to take over all of Asia, including India and the Near East."
> Henry A. Wallace (1952) on the Ruthless Nature and Utter Evil of Soviet Communism: Cold-War Era God-That-Failed Weblogging
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that's my point.
> 
> As you've said...if it walks like a duck.....
> 
> Wallace apparently was a big advocate of things like universal health care.  He had concerns for the fact that people did not have the basics.
> 
> Most socialists I know start out as ideologues.  But the realities of human nature just seem to get in the way.
> 
> And his admission is as close as you'll get....but those who scream about how it is so bloody "clear" that Obama saved us from a great depression (all speculation) won't accept your assertions without bloodwritten proof.
> 
> It's no longer about the politics....it's about them being to stupid and stubborn to admit they are wrong.
> 
> Look at Dot Com's constant bleating (generally one line turds)....what proof has he provided on anything ?
Click to expand...




1. The progressive left, and the liberal left, while not themselves communists, share many of the same sympathies, such of redistribution of wealth, and worker’s rights, nationalizations of industry, etc, but are not quite as far left as the communists, and would not go to the same lengths as the communists to achieve their goals.* This does not mean, though, that the help of these dupes is not necessary in order for the communists to achieve victory. Even at their peak, in the ‘30’s, the Communist Party of the United States never had more than 100 thousand members: so deception of the ‘dupes’ was critical.*

The archives tell a tale of plans and schemes between the CPUSA and the Communist International in Moscow, to dupe progressives and liberals: “go to rallies,” “don’t let them know you are a communist!,” “If anyone reveals that you are a communist, claim it is red-baiting,”  “yell ‘McCarthyism!”  
Dr. Paul Kengor, Hoover Institution, Stanford  “DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century”  

2. "Wallace apparently was a big advocate of things like universal health care. "
a. Government control of private sector activity...is aptly described as Bolshevik- or Marxist, socialist, collectivist, statist, or, for that matter, fascist, too. Indeed, nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917 (Banks, insurance companies and means of communications were also taken over by Soviet authorities immediately. Dziewanowski, "A History of Soviet Russia," p. 107.

b. Obama wasn't the first Bolshevik to support socialized medicine. For context, there was Henry Sigerist: "He devoted himself to the study of history of medicine._Socialized Medicine in the Soviet Union_(1937), and_History of Medicine_were among his most important works. He emerged as a major spokesman for "compulsory health insurance". ...He attacked theAmerican Medical Associationbecause of his conflicting views onsocialized medicine." Henry E. Sigerist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 And, Sigerist was one of the apologists for Stalin, including his state-engineered famine in the Ukraine. 7 million perished (The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33).

c. Sigerist "shared with the architects of Soviet health policy under Stalin an outlook best described as medical totalitarianism. He really believed that humanity would be better off if every individual were under the medical supervision of the state from cradle to grave....[and] Sigerist's belief in the necessity for state control over all aspects of medicine ultimately made him an apologist for state control over most aspects of human life."  Fee and Brown, eds. "Making Medical History: The Life and Times of Henry E. Sigerist," p. 252


3. I bet you know that Reagan saw to it that everyone in the country, citizen or not, had healthcare.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....


Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
Click to expand...




Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.


Proves I don't lie, huh?


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
Click to expand...

Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
Click to expand...


PoliticalChic 

This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.

What a crack up.

And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
Click to expand...




Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?


----------



## Unkotare

Camp said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> More logical fallacy.
> 
> 
> 
> No, proof that money talks and bullshit walks.  ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Logical fallacy, you dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is it with you miserable people that have constant needs to call other people names? Do you not realize it is like a flashing sign that gives away your insecurities and lack of emotional strength or confident ego? What possible gratification could you get from calling an unknown anonymous person on a message board a dope? Why would you think it had any meaning?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being a dope anytime it gets too traumatic for you to hear the truth about yourself, dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you have to live such a miserable angry life. Try to find some happiness somewhere.
Click to expand...




Try to find a class on logic somewhere.


----------



## Unkotare

Unkotare said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone as adept at the art of cut and paste should understand about cutting the entire quote...
> 
> _Patton was a moron. There was no other way to describe it. His political accumen *was nowhere close to his military accumen*_
> 
> Patton shooting his mouth off about global political conditions he did not understand prevented him from getting promoted into positions of responsibility. Good thing we had Generals like Marshall and Ike who did understand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your problems with 'cut and paste'?
> 
> Is it the usual Liberal dodge, to avoid the facts presented....
> ...or is it jealousy in that you don't have the depth and breath of reading necessary to draw upon a multitude of sources?
> 
> Which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your zany rw tinfoil cutnpaste jobs are read by exactly no one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone sees her kick your ass every time you make the mistake of trying to argue any point. That's why you have to hide away here to snipe from behind the couch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't speak for everyone. You are one of a small number of anti-FDR folks who support her no matter what nonsense and lies she tells. You have made it clear you hate FDR. Unfortunately, other than the internment camps issue,  you rarely give links to support your anti-FDR fervor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I'm sorry, is throwing over one hundred thousand innocent people - AMERICANS - into _*concentration camps*_ not reason enough to label a fucking scumbag a fucking scumbag? Are his 'spaghetti on the wall' approaches to fucking with the national economy, creation of perpetual obligations that cannot be met forever, and sucking Stalin's dick necessary as well to round out the picture for you? How about his infidelity to his wife? How about sending a boatload of Jews back to the death that awaited them in Europe? Campaign lies? Strong-arming the Supreme Court? Fucking with the very foundation of our form of government? Requiring a Constitutional Amendment where personal character had served every president before him? How much do you need?
Click to expand...

.


----------



## Dot Com

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us the last post where you used a source.
Click to expand...

deflect much? You are a OldStyle/Redfish clone. They also spout a bunch of rw nonsense and also too lazy to source. You're in good company ASSCLOWN

ANOTHER rw n00b on ignore


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to Stalin- without American assistance, Germany would have defeated the Soviet Union.
> 
> But I will humor you.
> 
> Tell me your alternative strategy on December 11, 1941- the United States is at war with Japan, Germany and Italy.
> 
> Tell me what you think FDR should have done differently.
> 
> Go for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Easy peasy, lemon squeezy!
> 
> *1*. What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941,*America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!*
> 
> "Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile,leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." *These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.
> 
> 
> 2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.)*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
> 
> 
> 3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have *allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
> Baldwin writes that the United States put itself *"in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*
> 
> 
> 
> BTW....note how those last two words apply to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But isn't this the debate tactics that both sides utilize ?
> 
> And the double standard is pretty clear on this.
> 
> I don't agree with you on several points.
> 
> As an example....While Wallace appears to have been playing with half a deck, I don't know that he was communist or that you can state Roosevelt had a communist for a VP.  However, there has always pretty clear evidence of his sympathies.  Additionally, from what I recall...Wallace was kind of a whackjob religious nut.
> 
> But, you can't produce absolute, lock down tight explicit proof that such was the case.  Short of an explicit admission on his part (under oath, truth syrum, and threat of death....of course), everyone will sit there and say that "you've yet to produce any proof".
> 
> Which is  technically correct......your counter is that if it quacks like a duck......which is valid....but still allows others to room to step back in the face of pretty good evidence and say...."you have no proof".
> 
> And yet these same lying asswipes will smugly state that "Obama saved us from a depression"....you know the one we were never in.  And when someone says that's more a matter of probability than strict fact....they piss all over themselves to show you how it is absolutely true (even though you can't prove it because it was not allowed to play out).
> 
> So, every time I read the attacks (and BTW rightwinger and Dot Com post an attack...I have to laugh....while it requires a connection....at least you make an argument....again I don't always agree with you....they on the other hand can barely manage to get their Saul Alinsky approved BS talking points onto the board in one piece.), I have to laugh hard at their baboon type crap flinging methods.
> 
> I appreciate your efforts....even when you are wrong.
> 
> I do enjoy watching your opposition wet themselves in their rush to show you how wrong you are absent the same proof they want you to produce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If one supports the aims and methods of the communists....said person is a communist.
> 
> 
> Later in life, Wallace recanted....he actually wrote an apology for support of the above.
> 
> By every realpolitik metric, Wallace was a communist,and would have aided them in their every endeavor.
> 
> 
> 
> See the following, a letter of apology by Wallace:
> 
> "Up to a point, my analysis was sound, but it failed utterly to take into account the ruthless nature of Russian-trained Communists whose sole objective was to make Czechoslovakia completely subservient to Moscow.
> 
> 
> Today, knowing more about Russia's methods, I am sure it was a serious mistake when we withdrew our troops. Russia may not want a hot war at tang time in the net ten years, but she certainly wants such a continuation of the Col War as will enable her, through her satellites and internally-planted subversives, to take over the greatest amount of territory possible. Russia is still on the march, and the question now is whether she will be able to take over all of Asia, including India and the Near East."
> Henry A. Wallace (1952) on the Ruthless Nature and Utter Evil of Soviet Communism: Cold-War Era God-That-Failed Weblogging
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that's my point.
> 
> As you've said...if it walks like a duck.....
> 
> Wallace apparently was a big advocate of things like universal health care.  He had concerns for the fact that people did not have the basics.
> 
> Most socialists I know start out as ideologues.  But the realities of human nature just seem to get in the way.
> 
> And his admission is as close as you'll get....but those who scream about how it is so bloody "clear" that Obama saved us from a great depression (all speculation) won't accept your assertions without bloodwritten proof.
> 
> It's no longer about the politics....it's about them being to stupid and stubborn to admit they are wrong.
> 
> Look at Dot Com's constant bleating (generally one line turds)....what proof has he provided on anything ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. The progressive left, and the liberal left, .
Click to expand...


I accept your admission that you lied about FDR having a communist vice president.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
Click to expand...


So now you are admitting that Wallace was not a communist.

Why did you lie before?


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
Click to expand...


Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.

Does that make him a KKK member? 

I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
Click to expand...


You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
Click to expand...


Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.

But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....

I'd still call him a member.

Try again.


----------



## Camp

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
Click to expand...




Sun Devil 92 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
Click to expand...

This thread is in the History forum. Perhaps you find it odd that history buffs and historians, in general, are insistent on how facts are presented. History is not a series of commentaries voicing subjective opinions to reach an analytical conclusive objective "historical fact". Ms. PoliticalChic is presenting a conspiracy theory whereby she is reaching conclusions by the method described. Her conclusions are subjective, not objective. She is demanding that her subjective opinion must be accepted as objective facts. Those who disagree are called liars and a series of immature name callings.

It is a free country, so you can accept her nonsense if you wish. You can even give the old "this is what she really meant" back peddle defense You can even deflect the topic into a relationship with Obama and some allegation of everyone giving him praise for preventing a new Great Depression. What you can not do is expect to be taken seriously making those lame excuses. 

PC's conspiracy theory and the many posts of nonsense she presents does not hold up to the over 80 years of scholarly historical record that declares the exact opposite of her opinionated declarations, including the one about America having a sitting communist as a Vice President during WWII or FDR not doing a brilliant job of preparing America for WWII during the years leading up to WWII.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.
> 
> But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....
> 
> I'd still call him a member.
> 
> Try again.
Click to expand...


So- you think it is actually just entirely up to each persons interpretation- that identifying a person is entirely subjective- and that there is no actual definition of what a 'communist' is?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
Click to expand...




"....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."

As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.

Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.

Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.



You'll quickly see that your belief is simply more Leftist propaganda that simpletons like you bought like it was on sale.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.
> 
> But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....
> 
> I'd still call him a member.
> 
> Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So- you think it is actually just entirely up to each persons interpretation- that identifying a person is entirely subjective- and that there is no actual definition of what a 'communist' is?
Click to expand...




I produced direct quotes of folks who knew the situation intimately.

That is hardly subjective.

Imagine how little you'd have to say if you eliminated lies.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.
> 
> But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....
> 
> I'd still call him a member.
> 
> Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So- you think it is actually just entirely up to each persons interpretation- that identifying a person is entirely subjective- and that there is no actual definition of what a 'communist' is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I produced direct quotes of folks who knew the situation intimately.
> 
> That is hardly subjective.
> .
Click to expand...


Since Wallace was never a member of the Communist Party- and never called himself a Communist- and instead belonged to other political parties his entire life- all you did was provide direct quotes of people who also never said that Wallace was a communist.

So your opinion is entirely your bigoted and subjective opinion.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
Click to expand...


Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.

When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?

Well from the beginning- 

_McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]

 He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[

During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_

_In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.

Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.

But that is how Joe operated.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.
> 
> But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....
> 
> I'd still call him a member.
> 
> Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So- you think it is actually just entirely up to each persons interpretation- that identifying a person is entirely subjective- and that there is no actual definition of what a 'communist' is?
Click to expand...


I win !

I bet this was the next question in the tactical effort to deflect from the message of the OP.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
Click to expand...


Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.

Is that what this is saying ?


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us the last post where you used a source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> deflect much? You are a OldStyle/Redfish clone. They also spout a bunch of rw nonsense and also too lazy to source. You're in good company ASSCLOWN
> 
> ANOTHER rw n00b on ignore
Click to expand...


Oh look......a request for some evidence....and Dot Com runs for cover.

OMGosh....I'm on ignore...how will I ever live.

Quite fine since she does most of her posting in the Flame Zone from what I can tell.

But, I will make it clear I am not a right winger (Dot Bomb misses again). I detest the right as much as the left.

I don't agree with PC on a lot of things....but I appreciate that she, at least, brings some thought to the table.

Dot's little one line turds are the kind of posts that don't deserve attention.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.
> 
> But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....
> 
> I'd still call him a member.
> 
> Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So- you think it is actually just entirely up to each persons interpretation- that identifying a person is entirely subjective- and that there is no actual definition of what a 'communist' is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I produced direct quotes of folks who knew the situation intimately.
> 
> That is hardly subjective.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since Wallace was never a member of the Communist Party- and never called himself a Communist- and instead belonged to other political parties his entire life- all you did was provide direct quotes of people who also never said that Wallace was a communist.
> 
> So your opinion is entirely your bigoted and subjective opinion.
Click to expand...



Guess what: Karl Marx never carried a communist card either.


1. Henry Wallace, 1940-1944. “America’s main enemy was Churchill and the British Empire.” He insisted that peace would be assured *“if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe.”*
(Ronad Radosh, “Progressively Worse,” _The New Republic_, June 12, 2000)

2. When Stalin seized Czechoslovakia, *Wallace sided with Stalin. When Stalin blockaded Berlin, Wallace opposed the Berlin Airlift. After visiting a Soviet slave camp, Wallace enthusiastically described it a s a “combination TVA and Hudson Bay Company.”* Ibid,

3. In 1948, at the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of US politics, *FDR’s VP Henry Wallace, former Sec’y of Agriculture, to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Of course, Wallace’s “Progressives” allowed not even the most peripheral criticism of Soviet aggression*. (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,”_The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)

The progressives received one million votes. *The Communist Party USA did not field a presidential candidate, and instead endorsed Wallace for President. *(Progressive Party (United States, 1948) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


4. *Wallace met personally with KGB agents.* (Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev,_Haunted Woods_, p. 119)

5. “…several prominent journalists, including H.L. Mencken and Dorothy Thompson, publicly charged that *Wallace and the Progressives were under the covert control of Communists. Wallace was endorsed by the Communist Party (USA), *and his subsequent refusal to publicly disavow any Communist support cost him the backing of many anti-Communist liberals and socialists…” (Henry A. Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

6. In his diary, Wallace, whose view of the future of *America required Soviet-style Communism, *wrote that FDR had assured him that he was a few years ahead of his time, but that his vision for American would “inevitably come.” (John Patrick Diggins, “Good Intentions,” _The National Interest_, Fall, 2000)



He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
Click to expand...



This was your claim:
Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."

As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.

*Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*


You're not running off with your tail between your legs, are you, doggie?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us the last post where you used a source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> deflect much? You are a OldStyle/Redfish clone. They also spout a bunch of rw nonsense and also too lazy to source. You're in good company ASSCLOWN
> 
> ANOTHER rw n00b on ignore
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh look......a request for some evidence....and Dot Com runs for cover.
> 
> OMGosh....I'm on ignore...how will I ever live.
> 
> Quite fine since she does most of her posting in the Flame Zone from what I can tell.
> 
> But, I will make it clear I am not a right winger (Dot Bomb misses again). I detest the right as much as the left.
> 
> I don't agree with PC on a lot of things....but I appreciate that she, at least, brings some thought to the table.
> 
> Dot's little one line turds are the kind of posts that don't deserve attention.
Click to expand...




I've seen your posts.

You may be more of a right-winger than you imagine.

Those on the right are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society, and endorse limited constitutional governance.


The left are those who worship unimpeded big government- no constitutional restrictions, and the collective.


Sooooo.......


----------



## Sun Devil 92

PoliticalChic said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us the last post where you used a source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> deflect much? You are a OldStyle/Redfish clone. They also spout a bunch of rw nonsense and also too lazy to source. You're in good company ASSCLOWN
> 
> ANOTHER rw n00b on ignore
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh look......a request for some evidence....and Dot Com runs for cover.
> 
> OMGosh....I'm on ignore...how will I ever live.
> 
> Quite fine since she does most of her posting in the Flame Zone from what I can tell.
> 
> But, I will make it clear I am not a right winger (Dot Bomb misses again). I detest the right as much as the left.
> 
> I don't agree with PC on a lot of things....but I appreciate that she, at least, brings some thought to the table.
> 
> Dot's little one line turds are the kind of posts that don't deserve attention.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen your posts.
> 
> You may be more of a right-winger than you imagine.
> 
> Those on the right are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society, and endorse limited constitutional governance.
> 
> 
> The left are those who worship unimpeded big government- no constitutional restrictions, and the collective.
> 
> 
> Sooooo.......
Click to expand...


I would say that true liberals defend those things too.

It's the far right and far left that tend to want to use government to shove things down our throats.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> 
> using a source for his zany posts would prolly kill him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please show us the last post where you used a source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> deflect much? You are a OldStyle/Redfish clone. They also spout a bunch of rw nonsense and also too lazy to source. You're in good company ASSCLOWN
> 
> ANOTHER rw n00b on ignore
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh look......a request for some evidence....and Dot Com runs for cover.
> 
> OMGosh....I'm on ignore...how will I ever live.
> 
> Quite fine since she does most of her posting in the Flame Zone from what I can tell.
> 
> But, I will make it clear I am not a right winger (Dot Bomb misses again). I detest the right as much as the left.
> 
> I don't agree with PC on a lot of things....but I appreciate that she, at least, brings some thought to the table.
> 
> Dot's little one line turds are the kind of posts that don't deserve attention.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen your posts.
> 
> You may be more of a right-winger than you imagine.
> 
> Those on the right are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society, and endorse limited constitutional governance.
> 
> 
> The left are those who worship unimpeded big government- no constitutional restrictions, and the collective.
> 
> 
> Sooooo.......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would say that true liberals defend those things too.
> 
> It's the far right and far left that tend to want to use government to shove things down our throats.
Click to expand...




Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
Click to expand...





You made this false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."



I chuckled, and wrote: 'As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.

*Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.'*


*Am I correct that your example of an innocent American whose life was 'ruined' by false accusations, was.....*


*Owen Lattimore????????*


*Or was that erroneously added as part of the link you've quoted?*


*Be very, very careful here.....because my destruction of you will be even worse than earlier.*


*Are you naming Owen Lattimore as your example?*
I'm about to teach you another important lesson: Leftist propaganda is rife with lies.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.
> 
> Is that what this is saying ?
Click to expand...




He is, once again, out of his depth.

He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."



It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.


----------



## regent

I wonder if McCarthy didn't ruin his own life in a way? Did his guilt, his loss of ego with communism lead to even more drinking, more depression and finally one more bottle?


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> I wonder if McCarthy didn't ruin his own life in a way? Did his guilt, his loss of ego with communism lead to even more drinking, more depression and finally one more bottle?




What 'guilt' should he have been saddled with?

The great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarty, sacrificed his own life and career because he refused to do what you have done.....accept the lies of the Left.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's nail this down: he was as much a communist as you are a moron.
> 
> 
> Proves I don't lie, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.
> 
> Is that what this is saying ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is, once again, out of his depth.
> 
> He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.
Click to expand...


Joe the alcoholic.

Joe the liar.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if McCarthy didn't ruin his own life in a way? Did his guilt, his loss of ego with communism lead to even more drinking, more depression and finally one more bottle?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What 'guilt' should he have been saddled with?
> 
> The great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarty, sacrificed his own life and career because he refused to do what you have done.....accept the lies of the Left.
Click to expand...


Sacrificed....by drinking himself to death......


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
Click to expand...


The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.

And ruined Lattimore's life.

But that is what Joe did.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Donald Trump has been endorsed by former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke.
> 
> Does that make him a KKK member?
> 
> I don't think so- but apparently according to your standards- it would.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, I think we are talking about more than an endorsement.
> 
> But, I will say that if Trump espoused the policies of the KKK (and he may not be far off) but wasn't a member.....
> 
> I'd still call him a member.
> 
> Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So- you think it is actually just entirely up to each persons interpretation- that identifying a person is entirely subjective- and that there is no actual definition of what a 'communist' is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I produced direct quotes of folks who knew the situation intimately.
> 
> That is hardly subjective.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since Wallace was never a member of the Communist Party- and never called himself a Communist- and instead belonged to other political parties his entire life- all you did was provide direct quotes of people who also never said that Wallace was a communist.
> 
> So your opinion is entirely your bigoted and subjective opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck.....he was a communist.
Click to expand...


Once again, I accept your admission that you cannot back up your claim that FDR insisted on having a communist as his vice president.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your McCarthy era RED SCARE methods and tactics have become old worn out and boring. You have neither the skill nor academic expertise to pull your conspiracy nonsense off. You are making a claim that the Vice President during WWII was a communist. It didn't work over a half a century ago and it doesn't work now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.
> 
> Is that what this is saying ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is, once again, out of his depth.
> 
> He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe the alcoholic.
> 
> Joe the liar.
Click to expand...


Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?

Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?

And is this thread about Joe ?


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
Click to expand...


Can you supply a link please ?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
Click to expand...




Excellent!

So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."

*Owen Lattimore.*


*The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.


Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists
*


1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." * 
*Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist
*

2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.

a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*

b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."

c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."                                                      * (Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations

3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
Joseph McCarthy

4. Life "ruined"??????

Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)

As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"

And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!

The only thing ruined here is you.....

...by me.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to that true American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.
> 
> Is that what this is saying ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is, once again, out of his depth.
> 
> He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe the alcoholic.
> 
> Joe the liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?
> 
> Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?
> 
> And is this thread about Joe ?
Click to expand...


We don't know- we know he was an alcoholic and we know that alcoholism can impair judgement and can lead to various psychosis's. 

Certainly- an alcoholic can tell the truth or an alcoholic can lie- this specific alcoholic lied. 

This thread certainly is not about Joe or Wallace- yet here we are.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> *Owen Lattimore.*
> 
> 
> *The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."*
Click to expand...


Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.

Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar. 

You have much in common with him.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.
> 
> Is that what this is saying ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is, once again, out of his depth.
> 
> He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe the alcoholic.
> 
> Joe the liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?
> 
> Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?
> 
> And is this thread about Joe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We don't know- we know he was an alcoholic and we know that alcoholism can impair judgement and can lead to various psychosis's.
> 
> Certainly- an alcoholic can tell the truth or an alcoholic can lie- this specific alcoholic lied.
> 
> This thread certainly is not about Joe or Wallace- yet here we are.
Click to expand...





The thread has become an expose of how Leftists like you behave when there most closely held beliefs have been torn asunder.


I admit to schadenfreude.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> *Owen Lattimore.*
> 
> 
> *The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.
Click to expand...




"Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.

Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar."

*Hold on tight, and, at no time allow your arms outside of the ride!*

*Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*



1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
*Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*


2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.

a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*

b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."

c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations

3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
Joseph McCarthy

4. Life "ruined"??????

Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)

As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"

And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!

The only thing ruined here is you.....

...by me.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are we saying that an alcoholic can never state the truth.
> 
> Is that what this is saying ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is, once again, out of his depth.
> 
> He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe the alcoholic.
> 
> Joe the liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?
> 
> Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?
> 
> And is this thread about Joe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We don't know- we know he was an alcoholic and we know that alcoholism can impair judgement and can lead to various psychosis's.
> 
> Certainly- an alcoholic can tell the truth or an alcoholic can lie- this specific alcoholic lied.
> 
> This thread certainly is not about Joe or Wallace- yet here we are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thread has become an expose of how Leftists like you behave when there most closely held beliefs have been torn asunder.
> 
> 
> I admit to schadenfreude.
Click to expand...


Oh I am just amused by pointing out what a feckless liar you are.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> *Owen Lattimore.*
> 
> 
> *The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
Click to expand...

The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.

And ruined Lattimore's life.

But that is what Joe did


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> *Owen Lattimore.*
> 
> 
> *The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
Click to expand...




I love it!!!!

Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!



*Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is, once again, out of his depth.
> 
> He accepted the lies of the Left, and the false claim about Senator Joseph McCarthy...that he "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens when he finds he cannot support that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe the alcoholic.
> 
> Joe the liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?
> 
> Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?
> 
> And is this thread about Joe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We don't know- we know he was an alcoholic and we know that alcoholism can impair judgement and can lead to various psychosis's.
> 
> Certainly- an alcoholic can tell the truth or an alcoholic can lie- this specific alcoholic lied.
> 
> This thread certainly is not about Joe or Wallace- yet here we are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thread has become an expose of how Leftists like you behave when there most closely held beliefs have been torn asunder.
> 
> 
> I admit to schadenfreude.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I am just amused by pointing out what a feckless liar you are.
Click to expand...




Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?

By this:

*Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*



1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
*Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*


2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.

a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*

b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."

c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations

3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
Joseph McCarthy

4. Life "ruined"??????

Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)

As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"

And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!

The only thing ruined here is you.....

...by me.


You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.

Not a single one.


What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?

They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"


And you did just that.


Gads, this is fun.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> *Owen Lattimore.*
> 
> 
> *The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!
> 
> 
> 
> *Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*
Click to expand...


The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.

And ruined Lattimore's life.

But that is what Joe did


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Joe the alcoholic.
> 
> Joe the liar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?
> 
> Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?
> 
> And is this thread about Joe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We don't know- we know he was an alcoholic and we know that alcoholism can impair judgement and can lead to various psychosis's.
> 
> Certainly- an alcoholic can tell the truth or an alcoholic can lie- this specific alcoholic lied.
> 
> This thread certainly is not about Joe or Wallace- yet here we are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thread has become an expose of how Leftists like you behave when there most closely held beliefs have been torn asunder.
> 
> 
> I admit to schadenfreude.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I am just amused by pointing out what a feckless liar you are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?
> 
> By this:
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.
> 
> Not a single one.
> 
> 
> What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?
> 
> They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"
> 
> 
> And you did just that.
> 
> 
> Gads, this is fun.
Click to expand...

The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.

And ruined Lattimore's life.

But that is what Joe did


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalChic said:


> What 'guilt' should he have been saddled with?
> 
> The great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarty, sacrificed his own life and career because he refused to do what you have done.....accept the lies of the Left.


You have out kool aided yourself  this time PoliyicalSpice


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Dot Com said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> What 'guilt' should he have been saddled with?
> 
> The great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarty, sacrificed his own life and career because he refused to do what you have done.....accept the lies of the Left.
> 
> 
> 
> You have out kool aided yourself  this time PoliyicalSpice
Click to expand...


I know you meant to include a link or two to back up your claims.

Must not have made it into the post.

I'm sure we'll see them the next time around.


----------



## regent

When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> So....you are now on record claiming that your best example of Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> *Owen Lattimore.*
> 
> 
> *The only difference between Custer’s Last Stand and what I’m about to do to you is that Custer didn’t have to read the post afterwards.
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!
> 
> 
> 
> *Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
Click to expand...




And this post, a typical Liberal post....is a priori evidence of mental illness.

I prove that both Lattimore was a communist....and so stated by a Democrat committee....

...and....in no way was his life "ruined"....he continued to be paid by John Hopkins, and was given a further position by Harvard.




I proved it as follows:
Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?

By this:

*Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*



1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
*Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*


2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.

a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*

b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."

c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations

3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
Joseph McCarthy

4. Life "ruined"??????

Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)

As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"

And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!

The only thing ruined here is you.....

...by me.


You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.

Not a single one.


What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?

They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"



Yet the Liberal position is shown thus:







That's you on the end, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Was Joe lying because he was an alcoholic ?
> 
> Can an alcoholic ever tell the truth ?
> 
> And is this thread about Joe ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We don't know- we know he was an alcoholic and we know that alcoholism can impair judgement and can lead to various psychosis's.
> 
> Certainly- an alcoholic can tell the truth or an alcoholic can lie- this specific alcoholic lied.
> 
> This thread certainly is not about Joe or Wallace- yet here we are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thread has become an expose of how Leftists like you behave when there most closely held beliefs have been torn asunder.
> 
> 
> I admit to schadenfreude.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh I am just amused by pointing out what a feckless liar you are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?
> 
> By this:
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.
> 
> Not a single one.
> 
> 
> What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?
> 
> They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"
> 
> 
> And you did just that.
> 
> 
> Gads, this is fun.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
Click to expand...




"The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
And ruined Lattimore's life."



Got ya' again....

On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?





Now...don't pussy-foot around.....

State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?


As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent  Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
...ruined their lives with false accusations.


Is that your position?


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...don't pussy-foot around.....
> 
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent  Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position?
Click to expand...

My mama said stay away from drunks.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...don't pussy-foot around.....
> 
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent  Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My mama said stay away from drunks.
Click to expand...




Ooooo......look who's afraid to state his position!

Do you want to go huddle with your 'historians' so they can tell you what to say (certainly not 'think.')


C'mon, you weenie....
State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?


As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
...ruined their lives with false accusations.


Is that your position? Is that what you've been trained to believe?


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalChic said:


> "The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> And ruined Lattimore's life."
> 
> 
> 
> Got ya' again....
> 
> On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations


"renewamerica.com"?  Is that ANOTHER one of your so-called *cough* "sources" PoliticalSpice?

This is not the elementary school debate team PoliSpice YET you think no one will call you on your hack sourcing


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!
> 
> 
> 
> *Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this post, a typical Liberal post....is a priori evidence of mental illness.
> 
> I prove that both Lattimore was a communist....and so stated by a Democrat committee....
> 
> ...and....in no way was his life "ruined"....he continued to be paid by John Hopkins, and was given a further position by Harvard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I proved it as follows:
> Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?
> 
> By this:
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.
> 
> Not a single one.
> 
> 
> What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?
> 
> They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the Liberal position is shown thus:
> 
> View attachment 57804
> 
> 
> That's you on the end, huh?
Click to expand...


Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.

Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.

You have much in common with him.[

You lied- and I caught you in your lie.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the alcoholic Senator who lied to the American people and ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you supply a link please ?
Click to expand...


I can- would the facts matter to you?

IF I did provide you with the link for what I stated- that Joe lied by claiming that he had proof someone was a spy- but didn't- would it matter to you? Would change your opinion about Joe?

Or will you just rationalize why it was okay for Joe to lie?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

rightwinger said:


> Reagan was no FDR
> 
> Reagan: Mr Gorbachev....please tear down this wall
> 
> FDR kicked the fucking wall down



LOL!!!

LOloloLOLOLOMFG!!!!

That's fucking hilarious!!!

FDR Was Stalin's personal sock puppet!!


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...don't pussy-foot around.....
> 
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent  Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ..
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe didn't care whether he was correct or not- for him the important thing was to make the accusation in front of the cameras.
> 
> Some of the people he accused were communists- most weren't. Joe didn't care.
Click to expand...


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!
> 
> 
> 
> *Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this post, a typical Liberal post....is a priori evidence of mental illness.
> 
> I prove that both Lattimore was a communist....and so stated by a Democrat committee....
> 
> ...and....in no way was his life "ruined"....he continued to be paid by John Hopkins, and was given a further position by Harvard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I proved it as follows:
> Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?
> 
> By this:
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.
> 
> Not a single one.
> 
> 
> What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?
> 
> They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the Liberal position is shown thus:
> 
> View attachment 57804
> 
> 
> That's you on the end, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.[
> 
> You lied- and I caught you in your lie.
Click to expand...


Owen Lattimore was indeed a Communist spy as were most of FDR brain Trust


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!
> 
> 
> 
> *Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this post, a typical Liberal post....is a priori evidence of mental illness.
> 
> I prove that both Lattimore was a communist....and so stated by a Democrat committee....
> 
> ...and....in no way was his life "ruined"....he continued to be paid by John Hopkins, and was given a further position by Harvard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I proved it as follows:
> Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?
> 
> By this:
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.
> 
> Not a single one.
> 
> 
> What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?
> 
> They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the Liberal position is shown thus:
> 
> View attachment 57804
> 
> 
> That's you on the end, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.[
> 
> You lied- and I caught you in your lie.
Click to expand...




It's Christmas, and here you are: the gift that keeps on giving.

Everything I keep saying about Liberals....you prove them, wrapped in a big red bow!


Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?

By this:

*Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*



1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
*Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*


2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.

a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*

b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."

c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations

3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
Joseph McCarthy

4. Life "ruined"??????

Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)

As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"

And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!

The only thing ruined here is you.....

...by me.

You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.

Not a single one.


What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?

They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"


And you did just that.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This thread is in the History forum. Perhaps you find it odd that history buffs and historians, in general, are insistent on how facts are presented. History is not a series of commentaries voicing subjective opinions to reach an analytical conclusive objective "historical fact". Ms. PoliticalChic is presenting a conspiracy theory whereby she is reaching conclusions by the method described. Her conclusions are subjective, not objective. She is demanding that her subjective opinion must be accepted as objective facts. Those who disagree are called liars and a series of immature name callings.
> 
> It is a free country, so you can accept her nonsense if you wish. You can even give the old "this is what she really meant" back peddle defense You can even deflect the topic into a relationship with Obama and some allegation of everyone giving him praise for preventing a new Great Depression. What you can not do is expect to be taken seriously making those lame excuses.
> 
> PC's conspiracy theory and the many posts of nonsense she presents does not hold up to the over 80 years of scholarly historical record that declares the exact opposite of her opinionated declarations, including the one about America having a sitting communist as a Vice President during WWII or FDR not doing a brilliant job of preparing America for WWII during the years leading up to WWII.
Click to expand...




I was just re-reading some posts about Roosevelt's early embrace of the homicidal maniac Stalin, and his efforts to make certain that communism survived...

....and I recalled when you posted this bon mot...

".... That guy was the moral compass for the nation...."        Tender Mercies: A Love Story | Page 5 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum



FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT?????

Moral compass??????
Hated Jews, blacks and Asian.
Extended the Depression, and WWII....both, by years!
Loved Stalin...the Katyn Forest massacre, the Ukrainian Terror Famine, the blood purges....


Oh, man.....I got such a chuckle out of that!
Quite the Christmas present!


Don't ever change


----------



## Dot Com

PoliticalSpice and Frank57 on an anti- FDR rampage? Say it aint so


----------



## regent

In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.


----------



## Syriusly

CrusaderFrank said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love it!!!!
> 
> Another "is not, is noooottttttt!!!' post by a Liberal!
> 
> 
> 
> *Give me a moment....I have to go get the Lysol spray to get your blood off my computer screen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this post, a typical Liberal post....is a priori evidence of mental illness.
> 
> I prove that both Lattimore was a communist....and so stated by a Democrat committee....
> 
> ...and....in no way was his life "ruined"....he continued to be paid by John Hopkins, and was given a further position by Harvard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I proved it as follows:
> Know how readers will judge which of us is the liar?
> 
> By this:
> 
> *Owen Lattimore was found to be "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
> His life was in no way ruined: in fact, as you prove, he became a hero to the Leftists who love communists*
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The State Department's Owen Lattimore was the man that McCarthy made the most allegations against. McCarthy went so far as to say that he would stake his entire reputation on the question of *whether Lattimore was a Communist agent. Now, of course, we have absolute proof that McCarthy was right." *
> *Senator Joe McCarthy, anti-Communist*
> 
> 
> 2. Lattimore had conferred (during the Hitler-Stalin pact) with the Soviet ambassador about Lattimore's upcoming assignment as President Roosevelt's adviser to Chiang-Kai-Shek — then trying to fend off the Communist revolution in his country.
> 
> a. Credible testimony revealed "five episodes" wherein *Lattimore — within the Politburo of the Communist Party — "participated as a full participant in the conspiracy."*
> 
> b. A former brigadier-general in the *Soviet military intelligence* testified to having been told that "Lattimore was one of our men."
> 
> c. On page 218 of the McCarran committee's voluminous report of its year-long investigation, this bottom line: "[T]he subcommittee can come to no other conclusion but that *Lattimore was for some time beginning in the 1930s a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy." *(Worthy of note was that* a Democrat-led Senate subcommittee would later define Lattimore as "a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy.")*
> The documented truth about the McCarthy investigations
> 
> 3. "Even* the truth about Owen Lattimore, the most famous of McCarthy's "victims," has finally come out,* thanks to a former Chinese espionage agent's memoirs and declassified FBI files, which go a long way to vindicate McCarthy's original charges. In retrospect, *the cause McCarthy made his own — anticommunism — has proved to be more valid and durable than the basic assumptions of his anti-anti-Communist critics.*
> Joseph McCarthy
> 
> 4. Life "ruined"??????
> 
> Lattimore was found to be a “conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy” by a unanimous Senate committee (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, _McCarty and His Enemies_, p. 274, quoting the _Congressional Record_)
> 
> As far as his life being ruined, “When Lattimore was indicted, Johns Hopkins put him *on leave with pay. He continued to have use of his office and secretary but taught no classes.”* Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China "d0e11129"
> 
> And, subsequently....he also lectured at Harvard!
> 
> The only thing ruined here is you.....
> 
> ...by me.
> You couldn't find a single example of any innocent whose life was "ruined" by McCarthy's charges.
> 
> Not a single one.
> 
> 
> What does a Liberal do when I document that what I say is true....and the Liberal propaganda is nothing but a pack of lies?
> 
> They screech "Is not, is nooootttttttt!"
> 
> 
> 
> Yet the Liberal position is shown thus:
> 
> View attachment 57804
> 
> 
> That's you on the end, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe McCarthy claimed that he had proof that Owen Lattimore was a Russian espionage agent.
> 
> Joe had no such proof- never presented any such proof- Joe McCarthy was a liar.
> 
> You have much in common with him.[
> 
> You lied- and I caught you in your lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Owen Lattimore was indeed a Communist spy as were most of FDR brain Trust
Click to expand...


Frankie is once again relying upon the voices in his head.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This thread is in the History forum. Perhaps you find it odd that history buffs and historians, in general, are insistent on how facts are presented. History is not a series of commentaries voicing subjective opinions to reach an analytical conclusive objective "historical fact". Ms. PoliticalChic is presenting a conspiracy theory whereby she is reaching conclusions by the method described. Her conclusions are subjective, not objective. She is demanding that her subjective opinion must be accepted as objective facts. Those who disagree are called liars and a series of immature name callings.
> 
> It is a free country, so you can accept her nonsense if you wish. You can even give the old "this is what she really meant" back peddle defense You can even deflect the topic into a relationship with Obama and some allegation of everyone giving him praise for preventing a new Great Depression. What you can not do is expect to be taken seriously making those lame excuses.
> 
> PC's conspiracy theory and the many posts of nonsense she presents does not hold up to the over 80 years of scholarly historical record that declares the exact opposite of her opinionated declarations, including the one about America having a sitting communist as a Vice President during WWII or FDR not doing a brilliant job of preparing America for WWII during the years leading up to WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was just re-reading some posts about Roosevelt's early embrace of the homicidal maniac Stalin, and his efforts to make certain that communism survived...
> 
> ....and I recalled when you posted this bon mot...
> 
> ".... That guy was the moral compass for the nation...."        Tender Mercies: A Love Story | Page 5 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
> 
> 
> 
> FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT?????
> 
> Moral compass??????
> Hated Jews, blacks and Asian.
> Extended the Depression, and WWII....both, by years!
> Loved Stalin...the Katyn Forest massacre, the Ukrainian Terror Famine, the blood purges....
> 
> 
> Oh, man.....I got such a chuckle out of that!
> Quite the Christmas present!
> 
> 
> Don't ever change
Click to expand...


Oh the Conservatives do hate FDR

Really how can they not? No GOP President except Lincoln has come close to his accomplishments

FDR led the United States to victory over Japan, Germany and Italy
FDR led the United States out of the Depression
FDR gave Americans social security, unemployment insurance, bank depositers insurance, the GI Bill and reduced unemployment from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1940- to no unemployment by his death
And was possibly the most popular President in American history

Of course Conservatives attack FDR


----------



## regent

[

Of course Conservatives attack FDR[/QUOTE
Like it or not America will be living with FDR's heritage for a long time to come, as we live with the heritage of Washington and. Lincoln. If Democrats have FDR, why are so many Republicans seemingly indifferent to Lincoln and even unwilling to claim him,  The closest Republicans seem to want to come to great presidents is Reagan, and Reagan's real claim to fame is that he voted for FDR.[/QUOTE]


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> To Review:
> 
> Henry A. Wallace, by every measure, was a communist....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This thread is in the History forum. Perhaps you find it odd that history buffs and historians, in general, are insistent on how facts are presented. History is not a series of commentaries voicing subjective opinions to reach an analytical conclusive objective "historical fact". Ms. PoliticalChic is presenting a conspiracy theory whereby she is reaching conclusions by the method described. Her conclusions are subjective, not objective. She is demanding that her subjective opinion must be accepted as objective facts. Those who disagree are called liars and a series of immature name callings.
> 
> It is a free country, so you can accept her nonsense if you wish. You can even give the old "this is what she really meant" back peddle defense You can even deflect the topic into a relationship with Obama and some allegation of everyone giving him praise for preventing a new Great Depression. What you can not do is expect to be taken seriously making those lame excuses.
> 
> PC's conspiracy theory and the many posts of nonsense she presents does not hold up to the over 80 years of scholarly historical record that declares the exact opposite of her opinionated declarations, including the one about America having a sitting communist as a Vice President during WWII or FDR not doing a brilliant job of preparing America for WWII during the years leading up to WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was just re-reading some posts about Roosevelt's early embrace of the homicidal maniac Stalin, and his efforts to make certain that communism survived...
> 
> ....and I recalled when you posted this bon mot...
> 
> ".... That guy was the moral compass for the nation...."        Tender Mercies: A Love Story | Page 5 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
> 
> 
> 
> FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT?????
> 
> Moral compass??????
> Hated Jews, blacks and Asian.
> Extended the Depression, and WWII....both, by years!
> Loved Stalin...the Katyn Forest massacre, the Ukrainian Terror Famine, the blood purges....
> 
> 
> Oh, man.....I got such a chuckle out of that!
> Quite the Christmas present!
> 
> 
> Don't ever change
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh the Conservatives do hate FDR
> 
> Really how can they not? No GOP President except Lincoln has come close to his accomplishments
> 
> FDR led the United States to victory over Japan, Germany and Italy
> FDR led the United States out of the Depression
> FDR gave Americans social security, unemployment insurance, bank depositers insurance, the GI Bill and reduced unemployment from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1940- to no unemployment by his death
> And was possibly the most popular President in American history
> 
> Of course Conservatives attack FDR
Click to expand...




Please....please......tell all once more how Owen Lattimore wasn't a communist!!!


Pleeezzzzzeeeee!


And....remind everyone that, contrary to your claim, you were unable to find a single, solitary innocent American whose life ......and I quote you.....

was,  "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations"  by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.





Normal folks would recognize that, unable to substantiate the 'common knowledge' slander of McCarthy, you'd begin to question same.

But not you!
After all, you're a Liberal, and have been trained to behave like a trained seal.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.





regent said:


> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.




What's the matter, you weenie?

Afraid of this question?

State what you mean: *was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?*


As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
...ruined their lives with false accusations.


Your avoiding the query would lead one to believe you know the truth: McCarthy was spot on!


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> [
> 
> Of course Conservatives attack FDR[/QUOTE
> Like it or not America will be living with FDR's heritage for a long time to come, as we live with the heritage of Washington and. Lincoln. If Democrats have FDR, why are so many Republicans seemingly indifferent to Lincoln and even unwilling to claim him,  The closest Republicans seem to want to come to great presidents is Reagan, and Reagan's real claim to fame is that he voted for FDR.


[/QUOTE]



"Lincoln. If Democrats have FDR, why are so many Republicans seemingly indifferent to Lincoln and even unwilling to claim him,..."

Really?








northeastern illinois university



Looks like Democrats are jealous.....or ashamed of their KKK and segregationist past, huh?


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You still have not given evidence to one of  the lies you are perpetrating in this thread. The Vice President of the USA during WWII was not a communist. To say he was based on your selective speculations to form an agenda driven opinion is a lie. Period, plain and simple. You are demanding people consider your conspiracy theory is factual and it is not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic
> 
> This is a classic example of what I was saying.  If the man didn't have a name plate on his desk saying (VP - Communist)....well, you just can't be right.
> 
> What a crack up.
> 
> And Obama saved us from the next great depression - now, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This thread is in the History forum. Perhaps you find it odd that history buffs and historians, in general, are insistent on how facts are presented. History is not a series of commentaries voicing subjective opinions to reach an analytical conclusive objective "historical fact". Ms. PoliticalChic is presenting a conspiracy theory whereby she is reaching conclusions by the method described. Her conclusions are subjective, not objective. She is demanding that her subjective opinion must be accepted as objective facts. Those who disagree are called liars and a series of immature name callings.
> 
> It is a free country, so you can accept her nonsense if you wish. You can even give the old "this is what she really meant" back peddle defense You can even deflect the topic into a relationship with Obama and some allegation of everyone giving him praise for preventing a new Great Depression. What you can not do is expect to be taken seriously making those lame excuses.
> 
> PC's conspiracy theory and the many posts of nonsense she presents does not hold up to the over 80 years of scholarly historical record that declares the exact opposite of her opinionated declarations, including the one about America having a sitting communist as a Vice President during WWII or FDR not doing a brilliant job of preparing America for WWII during the years leading up to WWII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was just re-reading some posts about Roosevelt's early embrace of the homicidal maniac Stalin, and his efforts to make certain that communism survived...
> 
> ....and I recalled when you posted this bon mot...
> 
> ".... That guy was the moral compass for the nation...."        Tender Mercies: A Love Story | Page 5 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
> 
> 
> 
> FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT?????
> 
> Moral compass??????
> Hated Jews, blacks and Asian.
> Extended the Depression, and WWII....both, by years!
> Loved Stalin...the Katyn Forest massacre, the Ukrainian Terror Famine, the blood purges....
> 
> 
> Oh, man.....I got such a chuckle out of that!
> Quite the Christmas present!
> 
> 
> Don't ever change
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh the Conservatives do hate FDR
> 
> Really how can they not? No GOP President except Lincoln has come close to his accomplishments
> 
> FDR led the United States to victory over Japan, Germany and Italy
> FDR led the United States out of the Depression
> FDR gave Americans social security, unemployment insurance, bank depositers insurance, the GI Bill and reduced unemployment from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1940- to no unemployment by his death
> And was possibly the most popular President in American history
> 
> Of course Conservatives attack FDR
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please....please......tell all once more how Owen Lattimore wasn't a communist!!!
> 
> 
> Pleeezzzzzeeeee!
> 
> 
> And....remind everyone that, contrary to your claim, you were unable to find a single, solitary innocent American whose life ......and I quote you.....
> 
> was,  "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations"  by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Normal folks would recognize that, unable to substantiate the 'common knowledge' slander of McCarthy, you'd begin to question same.
> 
> But not you!
> After all, you're a Liberal, and have been trained to behave like a trained seal.
> 
> DIA]
Click to expand...


Oh the Conservatives do hate FDR

Really how can they not? No GOP President except Lincoln has come close to his accomplishments

FDR led the United States to victory over Japan, Germany and Italy
FDR led the United States out of the Depression
FDR gave Americans social security, unemployment insurance, bank depositers insurance, the GI Bill and reduced unemployment from 25% in 1933 to 9% in 1940- to no unemployment by his death
And was possibly the most popular President in American history

Of course Conservatives attack FDR


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What's the matter, you weenie?
> 
> Afraid of this question?
> 
> State what you mean: *was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?*
> 
> 
> ]
Click to expand...


Joe was an alcoholic embarressment to the GOP- he lied about having evidence that persons were spied- and ruined persons lives.

No wonder PC admires a kindred spirit.


----------



## Unkotare

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What's the matter, you weenie?
> 
> Afraid of this question?
> 
> State what you mean: *was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?*
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
Click to expand...






Whoa...are there fdr-worshipping democrats here pretending to be opposed to ruining the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations? 


Does their hypocrisy know no bounds?


----------



## Camp

Joe McCarthy became the poster boy for two nasty bits of behavior that were highlighted and in the end, rejected as un-American. Guilt by association and the abuse of government to destroy the reputations of American citizens. He and his actions are the reason today's endless and useless Congressional investigative committees are called McCarthy-like and compared to that shameful age of institutionalized witch hunts. Destroying reputations and careers with speculation and opinion was determined to be despicable and drove the creator, McCarthy, into a life of rejection, alcoholism, loneliness and early death. He became one of the most reviled American politicians of the 20th Century. The OP thinks he was a hero.


----------



## Sun Devil 92

Syriusly said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism was illegal, as it's doctrine was the violent overthrowing of the Constitution.
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you supply a link please ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can- would the facts matter to you?
> 
> IF I did provide you with the link for what I stated- that Joe lied by claiming that he had proof someone was a spy- but didn't- would it matter to you? Would change your opinion about Joe?
> 
> Or will you just rationalize why it was okay for Joe to lie?
Click to expand...


It's never O.K. when someone lies.


----------



## Syriusly

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you supply a link please ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can- would the facts matter to you?
> 
> IF I did provide you with the link for what I stated- that Joe lied by claiming that he had proof someone was a spy- but didn't- would it matter to you? Would change your opinion about Joe?
> 
> Or will you just rationalize why it was okay for Joe to lie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's never O.K. when someone lies.
Click to expand...


And?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Unkotare said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What's the matter, you weenie?
> 
> Afraid of this question?
> 
> State what you mean: *was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?*
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoa...are there fdr-worshipping democrats here pretending to be opposed to ruining the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations?
> 
> 
> Does their hypocrisy know no bounds?
Click to expand...



At this very moment I am putting together an OP on the indelibility of their indoctrination.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> In some respects one of the most disturbing scenes in the McCarthy era was in the Shine hearing. McCarthy was accusing the army of communism because they had not given  a direct commission to G. David Shine, one of his assistants. As the hearing ended, people began packing up their cases,  talking and laughing, and somewhere in the room, McCarthy  was still making one of his communist speeches and no one was listening. The McCarthy period has ended, and for a split second I felt sorry  him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What's the matter, you weenie?
> 
> Afraid of this question?
> 
> State what you mean: *was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?*
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Joe was an alcoholic embarressment to the GOP- he lied about having evidence that persons were spied- and ruined persons lives.
> 
> No wonder PC admires a kindred spirit.
Click to expand...



As I just told Unk, I'm constructing an OP about the inability of you Liberals to think...and I may just make you the star.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Joe McCarthy became the poster boy for two nasty bits of behavior that were highlighted and in the end, rejected as un-American. Guilt by association and the abuse of government to destroy the reputations of American citizens. He and his actions are the reason today's endless and useless Congressional investigative committees are called McCarthy-like and compared to that shameful age of institutionalized witch hunts. Destroying reputations and careers with speculation and opinion was determined to be despicable and drove the creator, McCarthy, into a life of rejection, alcoholism, loneliness and early death. He became one of the most reviled American politicians of the 20th Century. The OP thinks he was a hero.




OK....ok....stop begging....

...here's your chance.

*Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*


----------



## PoliticalChic

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism became illegal in August, 1954- yet we have a Communist Party of America to this day.
> 
> When was "Tail Gun" Joe at his most virulant and dishonest?
> 
> Well from the beginning-
> 
> _McCarthy served a total tour of duty in the Marines lasting thirty months, or 2½ years, from August 1942 to February 1945, and he held the rank of captain by the time he was discharged in April 1945. He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of "Tail-Gunner Joe" in the course of one of these missions.[27]
> 
> He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A "war wound" that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or anti-aircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during a ceremony for sailors crossing the equator for the first time.[
> 
> During the hearings, McCarthy moved on from his original unnamed Lee list cases and used the hearings to make charges against nine specific people: Dorothy Kenyon, Esther Brunauer, Haldore Hanson, Gustavo Durán, Owen Lattimore, Harlow Shapley, Frederick Schuman, John S. Service, and Philip Jessup. Some of them no longer worked for the State Department, or never had; all had previously been the subject of charges of varying worth and validity. Owen Lattimore became a particular focus of McCarthy's, who at one point described him as a "top Russian spy". Throughout the hearings, McCarthy employed colorful rhetoric, but produced no substantial evidence, to support his accusations.[citation needed]_
> 
> _In 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy accused Lattimore in particular of being "the top Russian espionage agent in the United States_.
> 
> Of course Joe had no proof- and despite numerous hearings- no proof was ever provided to show Lattimore was a 'Russian espionage agent"- but because of Joe's lies- Lattimore lost his consulting jobs with the State Department and his academic career was damaged.
> 
> But that is how Joe operated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This was your claim:
> Senator Joseph McCarthy "....ruined the lives of innocent Americans with false accusations."
> 
> As I had so much fun stuffing the last bet that you lost down your throat....let's do it again.
> 
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The liar Joe- lied about Lattimore being a Russian Espionage agent.
> 
> And ruined Lattimore's life.
> 
> But that is what Joe did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you supply a link please ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can- would the facts matter to you?
> 
> IF I did provide you with the link for what I stated- that Joe lied by claiming that he had proof someone was a spy- but didn't- would it matter to you? Would change your opinion about Joe?
> 
> Or will you just rationalize why it was okay for Joe to lie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's never O.K. when someone lies.
Click to expand...




He's peddling harder than Ed Begley trying to make himself a piece of toast.

He tried to claim that McCarthy "ruined innocent lives with lies," but can't come up with a single example of same.


----------



## rightwinger

FDR wishes you a Merry Christmas


----------



## jillian

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.
> 
> Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?
Click to expand...


there still isn't any.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> FDR wishes you a Merry Christmas




Christmas???/

FDR????

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was *freedom of religion in the USSR.*"The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in *a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137


This was the same Roosevelt who had sworn an oath on his 300 year old family Bible, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The guy spoke out of both sides of his mouth.

Very much like you.



Merry Christmas....ya' big dope.


----------



## PoliticalChic

jillian said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> she can't..... that fact-based reality thing confuses her....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.
> 
> Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> there still isn't any.
Click to expand...




On top of not being very bright...you're a liar as well.


----------



## Wry Catcher

PoliticalChic said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.
> 
> Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> there still isn't any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On top of not being very bright...you're a liar as well.
Click to expand...


Don't forget to wish others a Happy Holiday.  The is the season of good will toward all, even the mendacious narcissists among us.  

Happy Holiday PC.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR wishes you a Merry Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christmas???/
> 
> FDR????
> 
> September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was *freedom of religion in the USSR.*"The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in *a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
> "Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137
> 
> 
> This was the same Roosevelt who had sworn an oath on his 300 year old family Bible, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
> 
> The guy spoke out of both sides of his mouth.
> 
> Very much like you.
> 
> 
> 
> Merry Christmas....ya' big dope.
Click to expand...

FDR was trying to justify an alliance with the soviets instead of the Nazis

I know how much that upset you Frau Braun


----------



## regent

Chic's history is awful, her sources questionable and her use of history i


PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...don't pussy-foot around.....
> 
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent  Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My mama said stay away from drunks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ooooo......look who's afraid to state his position!
> 
> Do you want to go huddle with your 'historians' so they can tell you what to say (certainly not 'think.')
> 
> 
> C'mon, you weenie....
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position? Is that what you've been trained to believe?
Click to expand...

I waited for years for McCarthy to produce the names of the communists that worked in the State Department and nothing. He started with the 205 number but it varied with speeches. Right now I would settle for the just the correct number McCarthy had on his  list of communists in the State Department. Can you tell us the correct number and tell us what happened to those communists?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it - or don't prove it- I have absolutely no expectation of any honesty or truth from you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're, lying.
> 
> You know I know soooo much more than you, that claiming said lie is your attempt to save face.
> 
> Not possible.
> 
> 
> Here comes your latest thrashing:
> 
> 1. ....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, *Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., *who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...
> 
> In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish.* The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." *
> America's Worst Vice Presidents - TIME
> 
> 
> 
> *"Even with FDR’s endorsement (and his threat to withdraw from the presidential race if Wallace were not chosen by the Democratic convention), Wallace won by only 628 to 459…Wallace was not allowed to give an acceptance speech."
> 
> FDR, Stalin, and Oliver Stone - The New York Sun                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              In your face, boyyyyeeeeeeee!!!
> *
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay- fascinating crap about Wallace.
> 
> Now- where is the proof about Truman having a communist VP?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> there still isn't any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On top of not being very bright...you're a liar as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't forget to wish others a Happy Holiday.  The is the season of good will toward all, even the mendacious narcissists among us.
> 
> Happy Holiday PC.
Click to expand...




Right back atcha, Wry....

Come back strong next year....


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR wishes you a Merry Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christmas???/
> 
> FDR????
> 
> September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was *freedom of religion in the USSR.*"The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in *a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
> "Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137
> 
> 
> This was the same Roosevelt who had sworn an oath on his 300 year old family Bible, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
> 
> The guy spoke out of both sides of his mouth.
> 
> Very much like you.
> 
> 
> 
> Merry Christmas....ya' big dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR was trying to justify an alliance with the soviets instead of the Nazis
> 
> I know how much that upset you Frau Braun
Click to expand...



"FDR was trying to justify an alliance with the soviets instead of the Nazis."

So true.

But....since Stalin was so much worse than Adolph, and killed so many more and enslaved even more...

....ask yourself why, Igor.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Chic's history is awful, her sources questionable and her use of history i
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When McCarthy drank himself into oblivion, somebody had to take his place as the great communist hunter, but who? At one time I thought Nixon coveted that spot, he sure seemed to be following in old Joe's footsteps, but then. Who took over from McCarthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now...don't pussy-foot around.....
> 
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent  Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My mama said stay away from drunks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ooooo......look who's afraid to state his position!
> 
> Do you want to go huddle with your 'historians' so they can tell you what to say (certainly not 'think.')
> 
> 
> C'mon, you weenie....
> State what you mean: was Senator Joseph McCarthy correct about communists or not?
> 
> 
> As your fellow nut-job....er, Liberal, stated 'Senator McCarthy ruined the lives of innocent Americans- those who didn't support communism and the communist conspiracy to subvert the United States government- ...
> ...ruined their lives with false accusations.
> 
> 
> Is that your position? Is that what you've been trained to believe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I waited for years for McCarthy to produce the names of the communists that worked in the State Department and nothing. He started with the 205 number but it varied with speeches. Right now I would settle for the just the correct number McCarthy had on his  list of communists in the State Department. Can you tell us the correct number and tell us what happened to those communists?
Click to expand...



1. Twice now you've run from this challenge...
*Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.*
*


2. "I waited for years for McCarthy to produce the names of the communists..."
*
a.* McCarthy’s primary goal was not to expose individual Communists, he was simply demanding of the liberal establishment: Why were they sheltering traitors? * It was the exact same point Eisenhower was making when he directed Attorney General Brownell to inform the public that President Truman had wittingly place a Soviet spy in a key position at the IMF… For decades, *people who should not have been allowed anywhere a government job were strolling into sensitive positions with the US government. For the most part, accusations were not aimed at sending the accused to a gulag, only to private practice.*


b. “A host of other right-wing Republicans had sought to dramatize the communism issue, but only McCarthy succeeded. And *McCarthy succeeded *while the others did not in part because of his thoroughgoing contempt for the rules of political controversy.” 
Michael Paul Rogin, _The Intellectuals and McCarthy: The Radical Specter_, p. 251

He forced liberals to explain themselves in full view of the American people. So they made McCarthy the issue.


c. The question wasn’t simply whether people like William Remington were agents of Stalin. He was [War Production Board; Office of Emergency Management, convicted for perjury, killed in prison] *(see listing of Soviet agents List of Eastern Bloc agents in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) * The question was whether he should be working for the government. 

*
3. And the people caught on....and agreed with McCarthy*
During the 1950s, the Gallup Organization responded to new issues and personalities as they related to the ongoing superpower struggle. Joseph McCarthy entered the public opinion polls for the first time, and won initial approval. *Fifty percent agreed with McCarthy in a March 1950 survey that there were communists working in the State Department.Note 45 A June 1950 poll found 45 percent expressed unqualified approval of McCarthy saying "he is anxious to rid us of communists and he is right"; *16 percent expressed qualified approval with remarks such as "there must be some foundation for his charges, but they are greatly exaggerated"; 31 percent disbelieved McCarthy saying he is "a rabble-rouser seeking personal glory who is trying to get reelected"; 8 percent were unsure what to make of McCarthy.
Cold War International History Conference: Paper by John White


----------



## regent

So then America had a chance to experience McCarthy in the Army-McCarthy hearings and all  that changed, check how McCarthy and McCarthyism are seen by Americans today.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> So then America had a chance to experience McCarthy in the Army-McCarthy hearings and all  that changed, check how McCarthy and McCarthyism are seen by Americans today.




1.  Fifty years of liberal propaganda has people thinking of Communist Party member as lovable idealists and the urge to fire them from their government jobs as an irrational anachronistic prejudice.  Allowing card-carrying members of the Communist Party to handle classified material after the Alger Hiss case would be like encouraging al-Qaeda members to carry box cutters on airplanes after 9-11.
Coulter


a. Even after the scandal of the Rosenberg cell emerging from the Army, the Army was still employing security risks. Beginning in early 1953, for a whole year, Army intelligence issued urgent warnings about *Captain Irving Peress, reports stating that Peress was an active member of the Communist Par*ty, that he was “very disloyal and untrustworthy.”
Arthur Herman, _Joseph McCarty: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator,_ p. 248 
He was thought to be organizing *a Communist cell on the Army base*. His company commander wanted him dismissed on grounds of national security. 
David Oshinsky, _A Conspiracy So Immense_, p. 366-367 
Instead* the Army promoted him to Major! McCarty exposed the Army’s stupidity in dealing with Peress.* The result?  Honorable discharge.  And McCarty was attacked by Vermont Republican Senator Flanders, stating the Peress was merely “a pink dentist in New Jersey.”



2.  Thrice now you've run from this challenge...
*Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.

So we can stipulate, based on your cowardice, that Senator McCarthy was a true hero, the Paul Revere of the era, who never.....never.....'ruined the lives of any Americans innocent of communist taint.'

*


----------



## Dot Com

FDR- won a world war and created an industrial super power

Ronnie- 32 criminal convictions in his Admin


----------



## regent

The Paul Revere of his era, ruined at least one career, and that was his own.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> The Paul Revere of his era, ruined at least one career, and that was his own.





So....why do you Liberal liars constantly claim he 'ruined' innocent folks' lives when he revealed that they were communists and communist supporters?


Must be fear of the truth, huh?


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Paul Revere of his era, ruined at least one career, and that was his own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....why do you Liberal liars constantly claim he 'ruined' innocent folks' lives when he revealed that they were communists and communist supporters?
> 
> 
> Must be fear of the truth, huh?
Click to expand...

His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours. So what is a communist or a communist supporter? Who is given the authority to label someone a communist or fascist and what evidence is required? We probably all have made statements at one time that some nut could claim were fascist or communistic.  
Perhaps one that is publicly anticommunist and makes speeches about the communists in all about us  is the real communist  and the anticommunist speeches are the real cover? What evidence did McCarthy have that there were 205, or whatever number he was using at the time, have for those communists in the State Department?


----------



## Dot Com

PoliChic makes Michelle Malkin look tame what w/ her openly hack sources. At least Malkin will try to give off the appearance of subjectivity in rare instances. PoliticalSpice? Never. She didn't just drink the Randian kool aid, she finished it off!!!


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So then America had a chance to experience McCarthy in the Army-McCarthy hearings and all  that changed, check how McCarthy and McCarthyism are seen by Americans today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  Fifty years of liberal propaganda has people thinking of Communist Party member as lovable idealists and the urge to fire them from their government jobs as an irrational anachronistic prejudice.  Allowing card-carrying members of the Communist Party to handle classified material after the Alger Hiss case would be like encouraging al-Qaeda members to carry box cutters on airplanes after 9-11.
> Coulter
> 
> 
> a. Even after the scandal of the Rosenberg cell emerging from the Army, the Army was still employing security risks. Beginning in early 1953, for a whole year, Army intelligence issued urgent warnings about *Captain Irving Peress, reports stating that Peress was an active member of the Communist Par*ty, that he was “very disloyal and untrustworthy.”
> Arthur Herman, _Joseph McCarty: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator,_ p. 248
> He was thought to be organizing *a Communist cell on the Army base*. His company commander wanted him dismissed on grounds of national security.
> David Oshinsky, _A Conspiracy So Immense_, p. 366-367
> Instead* the Army promoted him to Major! McCarty exposed the Army’s stupidity in dealing with Peress.* The result?  Honorable discharge.  And McCarty was attacked by Vermont Republican Senator Flanders, stating the Peress was merely “a pink dentist in New Jersey.”
> 
> 
> 
> 2.  Thrice now you've run from this challenge...
> *Bet you can't name any non-communist, or one who wasn't a supporter of communism, whose 'life was ruined by accusations' by the great American hero, Senator Joseph McCarthy.
> 
> So we can stipulate, based on your cowardice, that Senator McCarthy was a true hero, the Paul Revere of the era, who never.....never.....'ruined the lives of any Americans innocent of communist taint.'
> *
Click to expand...

PC answers her own question about who got hurt by McCarthy. An Army dentist was accused of being a communist. The Army stood behind the dentist and even gave him a promotion and an honorable discharge. Still the man had to live the rest of his life with the false accusation that he was a communist operative or spy for the USSR and a disloyal American. To this day, his descendants have to live with that false accusation promoted by the likes of PC. 
All of the falsely accused suffered the consequences of Senator McCarthy's false accusations, as did their families and friends. 

www.coldwar.org/articles/50s/senatorjosephmccarthy.asp

www.spartacus-educational.com/USAmccarthy.htm


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR wishes you a Merry Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christmas???/
> 
> FDR????
> 
> September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was *freedom of religion in the USSR.*"The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in *a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
> "Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137
> 
> 
> This was the same Roosevelt who had sworn an oath on his 300 year old family Bible, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
> 
> The guy spoke out of both sides of his mouth.
> 
> Very much like you.
> 
> 
> 
> Merry Christmas....ya' big dope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> FDR was trying to justify an alliance with the soviets instead of the Nazis
> 
> I know how much that upset you Frau Braun
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "FDR was trying to justify an alliance with the soviets instead of the Nazis."
> 
> So true.
> 
> But....since Stalin was so much worse than Adolph, and killed so many more and enslaved even more...
> 
> ....ask yourself why, Igor.
Click to expand...

Russia wasn't attacking US Navy ships in the Atlantic, dictating who America could trade with and making alliance with Japan.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Paul Revere of his era, ruined at least one career, and that was his own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....why do you Liberal liars constantly claim he 'ruined' innocent folks' lives when he revealed that they were communists and communist supporters?
> 
> 
> Must be fear of the truth, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours. So what is a communist or a communist supporter? Who is given the authority to label someone a communist or fascist and what evidence is required? We probably all have made statements at one time that some nut could claim were fascist or communistic.
> Perhaps one that is publicly anticommunist and makes speeches about the communists in all about us  is the real communist  and the anticommunist speeches are the real cover? What evidence did McCarthy have that there were 205, or whatever number he was using at the time, have for those communists in the State Department?
Click to expand...




"His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours."

Really?

First of all,I wanted an admission that he never "ruined the lives of innocent Americans via baseless accusations."

And you provided that proof.


2. Communists were those who wanted to replace the American government and Constitution with Stalin's dictatorship.
Communists answered to and/or agreed with Stalin.

a. "When anti-communism took its toll in Hollywood, the blacklisting took the “deadly” form of not having ones name in the credits, or living in Paris, or not being able to sell a teleplay for as much as three years. This for* folks who had no problem with Ukrainian farmers and their children eating their shoes."
*

b. *Roosevelt's New Deal was riddled with communists....paid agents of Stalin.* At a dinner party, a number administration officials spilled the beans, spoke openly about the *plans to cause a revolution so they can rebuild America in the Soviet's image.* "Wirt claimed he had "discovered" evidence of a plot within FDR's administration to launch a Bolshevik takeover of the United States..... garnering all kind of media attention, and even testifying before Congress about his evidence of *a "concrete plan" for the overthrow of the U.S. government crafted by members of FDR's "Brain Trusters." *"Roosevelt is only the Kerensky of this revolution," he quoted them. (Kerensky was the provisional leader of Russia just before the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.) The hoodwinked president would be permitted to stay in office, they said, *"until we are ready to supplant him with a Stalin." *The Washington Monthly



Six years after the Democrats on the select committee branded Wirt a liar, one of the members,* Democrat John J. O'Connor (Democrat, NY) "confessed in a statement today that he had helped prevent a thorough investigation in 1934 of charges by the late Dr. William A. Wirt that a group of New Dealers were plotting a new American revolution..*..expressed belief that most of the latter's charges had come true.....there was a deliberately conceived plot among New Dealers to overthrow the established social order in this country and substitute a planned economy.":

"O'Connor Admits Helping to Discredit Dr. Wirt," The Utica Observer-Dispatch, April 10, 1940.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Paul Revere of his era, ruined at least one career, and that was his own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....why do you Liberal liars constantly claim he 'ruined' innocent folks' lives when he revealed that they were communists and communist supporters?
> 
> 
> Must be fear of the truth, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours. So what is a communist or a communist supporter? Who is given the authority to label someone a communist or fascist and what evidence is required? We probably all have made statements at one time that some nut could claim were fascist or communistic.
> Perhaps one that is publicly anticommunist and makes speeches about the communists in all about us  is the real communist  and the anticommunist speeches are the real cover? What evidence did McCarthy have that there were 205, or whatever number he was using at the time, have for those communists in the State Department?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours."
> 
> Really?
> 
> First of all,I wanted an admission that he never "ruined the lives of innocent Americans via baseless accusations."
> 
> And you provided that proof.
> 
> 
> 2. Communists were those who wanted to replace the American government and Constitution with Stalin's dictatorship.
> Communists answered to and/or agreed with Stalin.
> 
> a. "When anti-communism took its toll in Hollywood, the blacklisting took the “deadly” form of not having ones name in the credits, or living in Paris, or not being able to sell a teleplay for as much as three years. This for* folks who had no problem with Ukrainian farmers and their children eating their shoes."
> *
> 
> b. *Roosevelt's New Deal was riddled with communists....paid agents of Stalin.* At a dinner party, a number administration officials spilled the beans, spoke openly about the *plans to cause a revolution so they can rebuild America in the Soviet's image.* "Wirt claimed he had "discovered" evidence of a plot within FDR's administration to launch a Bolshevik takeover of the United States..... garnering all kind of media attention, and even testifying before Congress about his evidence of *a "concrete plan" for the overthrow of the U.S. government crafted by members of FDR's "Brain Trusters." *"Roosevelt is only the Kerensky of this revolution," he quoted them. (Kerensky was the provisional leader of Russia just before the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.) The hoodwinked president would be permitted to stay in office, they said, *"until we are ready to supplant him with a Stalin." *The Washington Monthly
> 
> 
> 
> Six years after the Democrats on the select committee branded Wirt a liar, one of the members,* Democrat John J. O'Connor (Democrat, NY) "confessed in a statement today that he had helped prevent a thorough investigation in 1934 of charges by the late Dr. William A. Wirt that a group of New Dealers were plotting a new American revolution..*..expressed belief that most of the latter's charges had come true.....there was a deliberately conceived plot among New Dealers to overthrow the established social order in this country and substitute a planned economy.":
> 
> "O'Connor Admits Helping to Discredit Dr. Wirt," The Utica Observer-Dispatch, April 10, 1940.
Click to expand...

PC depends on and expects readers to NOT check her sources. If the reader clicks on The Washington Monthly link they will discover an article that actually disputes her entire post. She blindly used it because it contained a quote that fit her agenda, but the quote was used to show an example of a false reporting and allegation. Directly following the quote:

"Wirt's provocative tale soon feel apart; his "evidence" crumbled, and Republican leaders decided they didn't want anything to do with the guy. He quickly vanished from the public spotlight."

This is why cherry picking is mocked. The cherry picked quote comes from an article that refutes her conspiracy theory. Click on the link to see for yourself. It is a short article.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Paul Revere of his era, ruined at least one career, and that was his own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....why do you Liberal liars constantly claim he 'ruined' innocent folks' lives when he revealed that they were communists and communist supporters?
> 
> 
> Must be fear of the truth, huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours. So what is a communist or a communist supporter? Who is given the authority to label someone a communist or fascist and what evidence is required? We probably all have made statements at one time that some nut could claim were fascist or communistic.
> Perhaps one that is publicly anticommunist and makes speeches about the communists in all about us  is the real communist  and the anticommunist speeches are the real cover? What evidence did McCarthy have that there were 205, or whatever number he was using at the time, have for those communists in the State Department?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "His definitions of a communist were as flexible and meaningless as yours."
> 
> Really?
> 
> First of all,I wanted an admission that he never "ruined the lives of innocent Americans via baseless accusations."
> 
> And you provided that proof.
> 
> 
> 2. Communists were those who wanted to replace the American government and Constitution with Stalin's dictatorship.
> Communists answered to and/or agreed with Stalin.
> 
> a. "When anti-communism took its toll in Hollywood, the blacklisting took the “deadly” form of not having ones name in the credits, or living in Paris, or not being able to sell a teleplay for as much as three years. This for* folks who had no problem with Ukrainian farmers and their children eating their shoes."
> *
> 
> b. *Roosevelt's New Deal was riddled with communists....paid agents of Stalin.* At a dinner party, a number administration officials spilled the beans, spoke openly about the *plans to cause a revolution so they can rebuild America in the Soviet's image.* "Wirt claimed he had "discovered" evidence of a plot within FDR's administration to launch a Bolshevik takeover of the United States..... garnering all kind of media attention, and even testifying before Congress about his evidence of *a "concrete plan" for the overthrow of the U.S. government crafted by members of FDR's "Brain Trusters." *"Roosevelt is only the Kerensky of this revolution," he quoted them. (Kerensky was the provisional leader of Russia just before the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.) The hoodwinked president would be permitted to stay in office, they said, *"until we are ready to supplant him with a Stalin." *The Washington Monthly
> 
> 
> 
> Six years after the Democrats on the select committee branded Wirt a liar, one of the members,* Democrat John J. O'Connor (Democrat, NY) "confessed in a statement today that he had helped prevent a thorough investigation in 1934 of charges by the late Dr. William A. Wirt that a group of New Dealers were plotting a new American revolution..*..expressed belief that most of the latter's charges had come true.....there was a deliberately conceived plot among New Dealers to overthrow the established social order in this country and substitute a planned economy.":
> 
> "O'Connor Admits Helping to Discredit Dr. Wirt," The Utica Observer-Dispatch, April 10, 1940.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> PC depends on and expects readers to NOT check her sources. If the reader clicks on The Washington Monthly link they will discover an article that actually disputes her entire post. She blindly used it because it contained a quote that fit her agenda, but the quote was used to show an example of a false reporting and allegation. Directly following the quote:
> 
> "Wirt's provocative tale soon feel apart; his "evidence" crumbled, and Republican leaders decided they didn't want anything to do with the guy. He quickly vanished from the public spotlight."
> 
> This is why cherry picking is mocked. The cherry picked quote comes from an article that refutes her conspiracy theory. Click on the link to see for yourself. It is a short article.
Click to expand...




Of course, nothing you ever post is true.

Here....let's prove that.


1. "PC depends on and expects readers to NOT check her sources. If the reader clicks on The Washington Monthly link they will discover an article that actually disputes her entire post."

Far from the truth, I encourage education, something lost on your sort of fanatic ideologue.
As proof of same, I always include the link and source....as you inadvertently showed in your post.




2. I followed the first post, which discussed the Wirt story, with actual proof of the story...This:

I included this authentication in that very post...post #620

Six years after the Democrats on the select committee branded Wirt a liar, one of the members,* Democrat John J. O'Connor (Democrat, NY) "confessed in a statement today that he had helped prevent a thorough investigation in 1934 of charges by the late Dr. William A. Wirt that a group of New Dealers were plotting a new American revolution..*..expressed belief that most of the latter's charges had come true.....there was a deliberately conceived plot among New Dealers to overthrow the established social order in this country and substitute a planned economy.":

"O'Connor Admits Helping to Discredit Dr. Wirt," The Utica Observer-Dispatch, April 10, 1940.


3. Now....why didn't you mention the * Democrat John J. O'Connor confession......after all, it was included in the very same post?


Could be that you are simply a Roosevelt boot-licker, and the truth of the Wirt story would prove everything I've said about Roosevelt and Stalin, and their 'special' relationship?

*


----------



## PoliticalChic

*1. A footnote, and a significant one: Rexford Tugwell was appointed first as Assistant Secretary and then in 1934 as Undersecretary of the United States Department of Agriculture. The Department of Agriculture was filled the Stalinists. *

*At a dinner party attended by members of the Department, William A. Wirt testified to Congress that members of the "Brain Trust" planned a revolution, to take over the country.*
*Rexford Tugwell was the leader of the movement to take over the country and undermine the Constitution.*
*St. Petersburg Times - Google News Archive Search*


*a. WASHINGTON, April lft (#> —Standing on tiptoe in his earnestness, Dr. William A. Wirt today singled out' Rexford o. Tugwell, assistant secretary of agriculture, as the leader of a group that Wirt charges with plotting revolution.  http://news2.nnyln.net/plattsburgh-...ress-1933-december-21-1934-june-09 - 0830.pdf*


2. Tugwell, a Roosevelt favorite, despised the Constitution.
 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

3. 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." p. 48*


----------



## ScienceRocks

Lol, At least Roosevelts ideas made America strong which lead into the 50's and 60's having the biggest middle class on earth. Reagan screwed this up.


----------



## Syriusly

PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Syriusly said:


> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.


True.

And with each inane thread and post she reaffirms the genius of FDR, a president far superior to that of Reagan, and that after all these decades FDR is still able to get the best of republicans and conservatives.


----------



## regent

The anti-FDRer's have their hands full. They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, They have searched speeches, books anything that will counter the people's beliefs that lived during the FDR period, the very people that elected FDR four times in a row. Ironically the anti's got an amendment passed so that FDR will forever be the only president elected that many times. But it wasn't over, the historians in rating presidents added another insult and have never rated FDR less than third best president since 1948, and recently rated FDR America's greatest president.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Syriusly said:


> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.




FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> The anti-FDRer's have their hands full. They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, They have searched speeches, books anything that will counter the people's beliefs that lived during the FDR period, the very people that elected FDR four times in a row. Ironically the anti's got an amendment passed so that FDR will forever be the only president elected that many times. But it wasn't over, the historians in rating presidents added another insult and have never rated FDR less than third best president since 1948, and recently rated FDR America's greatest president.





"They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, ..."

Are you blind as well as dumb?

I've shown dozens of examples of both malevolence and ineptitude.

Resolve to stop lying in the New Year.


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
Click to expand...

No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.

 Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.

 By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".


----------



## Jroc

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
Click to expand...



The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years. 



> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.


"

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409


----------



## Camp

Jroc said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
Click to expand...

The depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash four years before FDR became President. During the period of FDR's Presidency, the countries agriculture industry was crippled or destroyed in vast regions due to the Dust Bowl. By 1940, the unemployment was reduced to 9% history books, scholars and virtually all academic sources put the official ending of the Great Depression as 1941.

By the way, if you bothered to read your link you would discover that the writers confirm that FDR could only be credited with 7 years of the depression at most, and they confirm everything I wrote in my post. They credit industries difficulty in escaping the depression due to FDR's policies that increased wages. The workers benefited, the private industry had to adjust to paying fairer wages.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Camp said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash four years before FDR became President. During the period of FDR's Presidency, the countries agriculture industry was crippled or destroyed in vast regions due to the Dust Bowl. By 1940, the unemployment was reduced to 9% history books, scholars and virtually all academic sources put the official ending of the Great Depression as 1941.
> 
> By the way, if you bothered to read your link you would discover that the writers confirm that FDR could only be credited with 7 years of the depression at most, and they confirm everything I wrote in my post. They credit industries difficulty in escaping the depression due to FDR's policies that increased wages. The workers benefited, the private industry had to adjust to paying fairer wages.
Click to expand...



FDR took over in 1933.

The second Depression, the result of his mismanagement, begin in full fury in 1937.

1.  Federal spending went from 2.5 % in 1929 to 9 % in 1936: Washington’s portion of the economy increased by 360 % in just seven years- *with no benefit to the economy*.

2.  Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in _The National Experience, _in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. *“The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: *national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

3.  In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page* report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.” * 
article - AEI


And Homo habilis, discovering his opposable thumbs, says what?


----------



## Camp

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash four years before FDR became President. During the period of FDR's Presidency, the countries agriculture industry was crippled or destroyed in vast regions due to the Dust Bowl. By 1940, the unemployment was reduced to 9% history books, scholars and virtually all academic sources put the official ending of the Great Depression as 1941.
> 
> By the way, if you bothered to read your link you would discover that the writers confirm that FDR could only be credited with 7 years of the depression at most, and they confirm everything I wrote in my post. They credit industries difficulty in escaping the depression due to FDR's policies that increased wages. The workers benefited, the private industry had to adjust to paying fairer wages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> FDR took over in 1933.
> 
> The second Depression, the result of his mismanagement, begin in full fury in 1937.
> 
> 1.  Federal spending went from 2.5 % in 1929 to 9 % in 1936: Washington’s portion of the economy increased by 360 % in just seven years- *with no benefit to the economy*.
> 
> 2.  Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in _The National Experience, _in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. *“The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: *national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .
> 
> 3.  In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page* report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.” *
> article - AEI
> 
> 
> And Homo habilis, discovering his opposable thumbs, says what?
Click to expand...

Notice that your often used quote by Schlesinger states that "...the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair...". This is exactly what I explained. FDR focused on ending the despair of the masses and made that his priority. The profits of private industry and for the people who were least affected by the depression in regards to the necessities of life and basic living conditions were put on standby.

You have been schooled on the temporary crash of '37 by multiple posters with multiple links in multiple threads but you choose to ignore the facts that don't fit your misinformation. FDR made the mistake of reducing and halting a number of his programs with the hopes that the country had moved forward enough to be able to progress without them. He followed the wrong advise and as soon as he reimplemented his programs the short lived set back shot back to the progress that had beeb made. Within two years the unemployment was lower than it had been in the entire decade and private industry began seeing a long awaited progress.


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The anti-FDRer's have their hands full. They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, They have searched speeches, books anything that will counter the people's beliefs that lived during the FDR period, the very people that elected FDR four times in a row. Ironically the anti's got an amendment passed so that FDR will forever be the only president elected that many times. But it wasn't over, the historians in rating presidents added another insult and have never rated FDR less than third best president since 1948, and recently rated FDR America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, ..."
> 
> Are you blind as well as dumb?
> 
> I've shown dozens of examples of both malevolence and ineptitude.
> 
> Resolve to stop lying in the New Year.
Click to expand...

Showing me and board members your dozens of examples is a waste. We do not create FDR's place in history. I have suggested more than once you must get your evidence to the historians; it is the historians that have and will create FDR's place in history not posters on these boards. All I ask is for you to inform we posters how grateful the historians are when they examine your evidence, and how they respond to your help.


----------



## Syriusly

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC shows in each of his threads that Conservatives have never forgiven FDR to leading the United States to victory in WW2, for leading the United States out of the Depression and for giving Americans the GI Bill, Social Security, Unemployment insurance and bank depositers insurance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash four years before FDR became President. During the period of FDR's Presidency, the countries agriculture industry was crippled or destroyed in vast regions due to the Dust Bowl. By 1940, the unemployment was reduced to 9% history books, scholars and virtually all academic sources put the official ending of the Great Depression as 1941.
> 
> By the way, if you bothered to read your link you would discover that the writers confirm that FDR could only be credited with 7 years of the depression at most, and they confirm everything I wrote in my post. They credit industries difficulty in escaping the depression due to FDR's policies that increased wages. The workers benefited, the private industry had to adjust to paying fairer wages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> FDR took over in 1933.
Click to expand...


And unemployment was 25% in 1933 and by 1940- it was down to 9%, and by the time FDR died it was virtually non-existant.

No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR

And of course FDR led the United States to victory against Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, and at the time of his death the United States was the most powerful country in the world- militarily and industrially.

No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR

And of course FDR brought the GI Bill, unemployment insurance, social security and bank depositers insurance to Americans.

No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR.


----------



## Camp

Americans continue to benefit from the policies, programs and legacy of FDR from 80 years ago. The best the FDR haters can do is try to compare Reagan, and there just is no comparison. His biggest accomplishment is that along with other world leaders, he helped bring the eventual end to the USSR. Problem there is that his contribution is debated, and worst of all, while the USSR ceased to exist, Russia and the Cold War was only put on delay. We are dealing with the sloppy job to this day. The threat of war with the old USSR, or at least the main body of it, still exist. 
Not much chance we will be at war with Germany, Japan or Italy any time soon. FDR beat them into begging to be our friends and allies. It has lasted well over a half a century.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The anti-FDRer's have their hands full. They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, They have searched speeches, books anything that will counter the people's beliefs that lived during the FDR period, the very people that elected FDR four times in a row. Ironically the anti's got an amendment passed so that FDR will forever be the only president elected that many times. But it wasn't over, the historians in rating presidents added another insult and have never rated FDR less than third best president since 1948, and recently rated FDR America's greatest president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "They have been searching for over eighty years to find something, anything evil about FDR, ..."
> 
> Are you blind as well as dumb?
> 
> I've shown dozens of examples of both malevolence and ineptitude.
> 
> Resolve to stop lying in the New Year.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Showing me and board members your dozens of examples is a waste. We do not create FDR's place in history. I have suggested more than once you must get your evidence to the historians; it is the historians that have and will create FDR's place in history not posters on these boards. All I ask is for you to inform we posters how grateful the historians are when they examine your evidence, and how they respond to your help.
Click to expand...






And there the mindless drone repeats his assigned fallacy yet again.


----------



## Unkotare

Syriusly said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR extended both the Depression and WWII, adding to the casualties in both.
> 
> 
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash four years before FDR became President. During the period of FDR's Presidency, the countries agriculture industry was crippled or destroyed in vast regions due to the Dust Bowl. By 1940, the unemployment was reduced to 9% history books, scholars and virtually all academic sources put the official ending of the Great Depression as 1941.
> 
> By the way, if you bothered to read your link you would discover that the writers confirm that FDR could only be credited with 7 years of the depression at most, and they confirm everything I wrote in my post. They credit industries difficulty in escaping the depression due to FDR's policies that increased wages. The workers benefited, the private industry had to adjust to paying fairer wages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> FDR took over in 1933.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And unemployment was 25% in 1933 and by 1940- it was down to 9%, and by the time FDR died it was virtually non-existant.
> 
> No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR
> 
> And of course FDR led the United States to victory against Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, and at the time of his death the United States was the most powerful country in the world- militarily and industrially.
> 
> No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR
> 
> And of course FDR brought the GI Bill, unemployment insurance, social security and bank depositers insurance to Americans.
> 
> No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR.
Click to expand...








Disingenuous BS X 2000


----------



## Syriusly

Unkotare said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, he didn't. You and some others have made that claim repeatedly and repeatedly been unable to make such a claim stand. It is nothing more than an opinion based on speculative and distorted data.
> 
> Proponents of the "lengthened the depression" idea use data related to industry and ignore data related to the mass's. Students of the Great Depression know that FDR chose to support the public relief programs that reduced real unemployment and kept massive numbers of citizens housed, fed and trained for future employment. The private industry hated this and in many cases, it did hold back progress in the private sector. FDR was cutting out the middleman, i.e., private sector and put resource where it helped the most people.
> 
> By 1940 the real unemployment figure was down to 9%, infrastructure had leaped ahead more than in any time in American history, much of which is still serving America 80 years later. In addition, as a bonus, FDR had quietly prepared the nation for war by developing modern aircraft, ships and other weapons and military hardware that greatly reduced casualties and the time needed to win WWII. By the time Congress finally took the coming war serious and provided funding, private industry had retooled or were in the process of retooling and it took only a little time to turn America into what became known as the "Arsenal of Freedom".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The great depression lasted for 15 years because of Roosevelt. As the rest of the world recovered, this country was stalled, because of Roosevelt's big government, socialist, control of American industry. The depression should have never lasted 15 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The depression began in 1929 with the stock market crash four years before FDR became President. During the period of FDR's Presidency, the countries agriculture industry was crippled or destroyed in vast regions due to the Dust Bowl. By 1940, the unemployment was reduced to 9% history books, scholars and virtually all academic sources put the official ending of the Great Depression as 1941.
> 
> By the way, if you bothered to read your link you would discover that the writers confirm that FDR could only be credited with 7 years of the depression at most, and they confirm everything I wrote in my post. They credit industries difficulty in escaping the depression due to FDR's policies that increased wages. The workers benefited, the private industry had to adjust to paying fairer wages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> FDR took over in 1933.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And unemployment was 25% in 1933 and by 1940- it was down to 9%, and by the time FDR died it was virtually non-existant.
> 
> No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR
> 
> And of course FDR led the United States to victory against Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, and at the time of his death the United States was the most powerful country in the world- militarily and industrially.
> 
> No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR
> 
> And of course FDR brought the GI Bill, unemployment insurance, social security and bank depositers insurance to Americans.
> 
> No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disingenuous BS X 2000
Click to expand...


All true- no wonder the Conservatives like PC prefer to create fiction to distract from the facts

And unemployment was 25% in 1933 and by 1940- it was down to 9%, and by the time FDR died it was virtually non-existant.

No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR

And of course FDR led the United States to victory against Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, and at the time of his death the United States was the most powerful country in the world- militarily and industrially.

No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR

And of course FDR brought the GI Bill, unemployment insurance, social security and bank depositers insurance to Americans.

No wonder why Conservatives hate FDR.


----------



## Jroc

Camp said:


> Americans continue to benefit from the policies, programs and legacy of FDR from 80 years ago. The best the FDR haters c
> an do is try to compare Reagan, and there just is no comparison. His biggest accomplishment is that along with other world leaders, he helped bring the eventual end to the USSR. Problem there is that his contribution is debated, and worst of all, while the USSR ceased to exist, Russia and the Cold War was only put on delay. We are dealing with the sloppy job to this day. The threat of war with the old USSR, or at least the main body of it, still exist.
> Not much chance we will be at war with Germany, Japan or Italy any time soon. FDR beat them into begging to be our friends and allies. It has lasted well over a half a century.




The Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe.  Of course we're not going to war with those countries, we rebuilt them. Roosevelt had nothing to do with that you moron. Its a stupid comparison anyway. He did however have something  to do with giving us 50 years of the cold war, Which Ronald Reagan, allied with Margret Thatcher, and Pope John Paul won. In spite of you leftest, European and American turncoats. Ted Kennedy is a good example...It's certainly not Reagan's fault, leftist like Bill Clinton, and Hussein Obama screwed up the aftermath.

Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR | Sweetness & Light


----------



## regent

In any case Reagan did brag that he voted for FDR every time FDR ran for president.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> In any case Reagan did brag that he voted for FDR every time FDR ran for president.




Reagan had to apologize for the scumbag fdr’s concentration camps.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> In any case Reagan did brag that he voted for FDR every time FDR ran for president.





Unlike you, he learned from his mistake.


1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin


2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations


3. He extended the Depression by years.


4. He disposed of the Constitution


5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal


6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.


7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.


8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War


*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*


10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?


And, he inspired lying Leftists like you.






If only Roosevelt had a mind of his own, and had, as his priority, what was good for America and Americans.

1. He would have recognized how evil Stalin and communism is/was.

2. He would have done what the experts advised, and made certain that Hitler and Stalin destroyed each other.

3. He would have given the anti-Nazi Germans the same support he gave the resistance in every other nation.

4. The war would have ended some 3-5 years earlier, with a half million fewer American casualties.


----------



## regent

I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?





You didn't 'suggest' it....you write that stupid comment because you can't dispute what I write, and you can't get Roosevelt's shoe-polish off your tongue.



I'm never wrong......and you inadvertently admit it.



Here.....I'm magnanimous.....try again......or I win 17 to nothing.



1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin


2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations


3. He extended the Depression by years.


4. He disposed of the Constitution


5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal


6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.


7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.


8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War


*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*


10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?


And, he inspired lying Leftists like you.






If only Roosevelt had a mind of his own, and had, as his priority, what was good for America and Americans.

1. He would have recognized how evil Stalin and communism is/was.

2. He would have done what the experts advised, and made certain that Hitler and Stalin destroyed each other.

3. He would have given the anti-Nazi Germans the same support he gave the resistance in every other nation.

4. The war would have ended some 3-5 years earlier, with a half million fewer American casualties.

5.Both Nazi and Marxist butchers would have received their due justice.

6. No 'Cold War.'

7. The Constitution would be our 'law of the land.'





I know it hurt, and couldn't happen to a nicer......


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?



Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.


----------



## regent

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
Click to expand...

And what might that fallacy be?


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
Click to expand...



Your never-ending appeal to authority.


----------



## regent

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
Click to expand...




Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
Click to expand...

Unlike some posters I realize that many people are experts in areas that I am not.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unlike some posters I realize that many people are experts in areas that I am not.
Click to expand...



One area is apparently understanding how logic works.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
Click to expand...




His feeble attempt to protect his _inamorata_...


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unlike some posters I realize that many people are experts in areas that I am not.
Click to expand...




Good that you recognize my expertise......and your lack of same.


----------



## regent

Did





PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have suggested you send all this information to the American historians that rate the American presidents? I would be very interested in their response for the help you have given them in history. If you  don't do something soon they will continue to rate FDR America's greatest and allow the record to stand that the American people voted for FDR four times for president, as did Reagan. If FDR's election was a Communist  plot was Reagan also involved?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unlike some posters I realize that many people are experts in areas that I am not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good that you recognize my expertise......and your lack of same.
Click to expand...

I give you that. Your expertise in name-calling  is unsurpassed. Your theme song seems to be that you are brilliant, but so far nothing but some  weak name calling.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> 
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unlike some posters I realize that many people are experts in areas that I am not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good that you recognize my expertise......and your lack of same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I give you that. Your expertise in name-calling  is unsurpassed. Your theme song seems to be that you are brilliant, but so far nothing but some  weak name calling.
Click to expand...






"Your expertise in name-calling is unsurpassed."
Guilty as charged...
You didn't mention that I do so while never being vulgar or obscene.



"Your theme song seems to be that you are brilliant, but so far nothing but some weak name calling"
Watch me prove you a liar.

I challenge you to find a single error:

1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin


2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations


3. He extended the Depression by years.


4. He disposed of the Constitution


5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal


6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.


7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.


8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War


*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*


10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?


And, he inspired lying Leftists like you.






If only Roosevelt had a mind of his own, and had, as his priority, what was good for America and Americans.

1. He would have recognized how evil Stalin and communism is/was.

2. He would have done what the experts advised, and made certain that Hitler and Stalin destroyed each other.

3. He would have given the anti-Nazi Germans the same support he gave the resistance in every other nation.

4. The war would have ended some 3-5 years earlier, with a half million fewer American casualties.

5.Both Nazi and Marxist butchers would have received their due justice.

6. No 'Cold War.'

7. The Constitution would be our 'law of the land.'



Or....you can simply say that I am 'brilliant.'
Then we'd agree.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> 
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again you fall back on the same old fallacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what might that fallacy be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your never-ending appeal to authority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unlike some posters I realize that many people are experts in areas that I am not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good that you recognize my expertise......and your lack of same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I give you that. Your expertise in name-calling  is unsurpassed. Your theme song seems to be that you are brilliant, but so far nothing but some  weak name calling.
Click to expand...




Based on your non-answer, we'll put you on the side admitting that I am brilliant.


Excellent.


----------



## mikegriffith1

FDR truly hated the Nazis, yet he shared some of their bizarre racial views about Jews, and he even refused to fill existing immigration quotas and in so doing refused to help thousands of Jews escape from Nazi-controlled Europe. The emerging story of FDR's betrayal and abandonment of the Jews is downright sickening.


----------



## PoliticalChic

mikegriffith1 said:


> FDR truly hated the Nazis, yet he shared some of their bizarre racial views about Jews, and he even refused to fill existing immigration quotas and in so doing refused to help thousands of Jews escape from Nazi-controlled Europe. The emerging story of FDR's betrayal and abandonment of the Jews is downright sickening.




"FDR truly hated the Nazis"

Let's check.

Hitler and Roosevelt actually had a pretty good relationship....


The National Socialists hailed these ‘relief measures’ in ways you will recognize:
May 11, 1933, the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, (People’s Observer): “Roosevelt’s Dictatorial Recovery Measures.”
And on January 17, 1934, “We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America…” and “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” comparable to Hitler’s own dictatorial ‘Fuhrerprinzip.’
And “[Roosevelt], too demands that collective good be put before individual self-interest. Many passages in his book ‘Looking Forward’ could have been written by a National Socialist….one can assume that he feels considerable affinity with the National Socialist philosophy.”
The paper also refers to “…the fictional appearance of democracy.”

In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…”  cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.

....until Roosevelt had to choose which pal to support....

*Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." 
Manly, "The Twenty Year  Revolution," p. 48*


FDR actually wanted to be in the dictator's club with Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini, until war broke out between them.


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR truly hated the Nazis, yet he shared some of their bizarre racial views about Jews, and he even refused to fill existing immigration quotas and in so doing refused to help thousands of Jews escape from Nazi-controlled Europe. The emerging story of FDR's betrayal and abandonment of the Jews is downright sickening.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps a couple of American presidents could have become dictators: Washington, and FDR might have made it, but when the smoke cleared our Constitution was still in effect with no dictator.
> 
> 
> "FDR truly hated the Nazis"
> 
> Let's check.
> 
> Hitler and Roosevelt actually had a pretty good relationship....
> 
> 
> The National Socialists hailed these ‘relief measures’ in ways you will recognize:
> May 11, 1933, the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, (People’s Observer): “Roosevelt’s Dictatorial Recovery Measures.”
> And on January 17, 1934, “We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America…” and “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” comparable to Hitler’s own dictatorial ‘Fuhrerprinzip.’
> And “[Roosevelt], too demands that collective good be put before individual self-interest. Many passages in his book ‘Looking Forward’ could have been written by a National Socialist….one can assume that he feels considerable affinity with the National Socialist philosophy.”
> The paper also refers to “…the fictional appearance of democracy.”
> 
> In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…”  cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.
> 
> ....until Roosevelt had to choose which pal to support....
> 
> *Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
> Manly, "The Twenty Year  Revolution," p. 48*
> 
> 
> FDR actually wanted to be in the dictator's club with Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini, until war broke out between them.
Click to expand...


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> FDR truly hated the Nazis, yet he shared some of their bizarre racial views about Jews, and he even refused to fill existing immigration quotas and in so doing refused to help thousands of Jews escape from Nazi-controlled Europe. The emerging story of FDR's betrayal and abandonment of the Jews is downright sickening.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps a couple of American presidents could have become dictators: Washington, and FDR might have made it, but when the smoke cleared our Constitution was still in effect with no dictator.
> 
> 
> "FDR truly hated the Nazis"
> 
> Let's check.
> 
> Hitler and Roosevelt actually had a pretty good relationship....
> 
> 
> The National Socialists hailed these ‘relief measures’ in ways you will recognize:
> May 11, 1933, the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, (People’s Observer): “Roosevelt’s Dictatorial Recovery Measures.”
> And on January 17, 1934, “We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America…” and “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” comparable to Hitler’s own dictatorial ‘Fuhrerprinzip.’
> And “[Roosevelt], too demands that collective good be put before individual self-interest. Many passages in his book ‘Looking Forward’ could have been written by a National Socialist….one can assume that he feels considerable affinity with the National Socialist philosophy.”
> The paper also refers to “…the fictional appearance of democracy.”
> 
> In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…”  cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.
> 
> ....until Roosevelt had to choose which pal to support....
> 
> *Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
> Manly, "The Twenty Year  Revolution," p. 48*
> 
> 
> FDR actually wanted to be in the dictator's club with Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini, until war broke out between them.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...





And?


----------



## regent

Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times, a record of what the American people believed. America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president. The military of that period trusted him.   
Not a lot of room for Republicans to make FDR into a communist, after Reagan said he voted for FDR four times.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,.....




Saddam Hussein was elected many times. Does that mean YOU must accept him as a great leader?


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> .... America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president.......




In Chinese schools today, students are still taught that Mao was a great leader. Does that mean he was?


----------



## rightwinger

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> .... America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Chinese schools today, students are still taught that Mao was a great leader. Does that mean he was?
Click to expand...

Father of their country


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times, a record of what the American people believed. America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president. The military of that period trusted him.
> Not a lot of room for Republicans to make FDR into a communist, after Reagan said he voted for FDR four times.





"Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,..."

Had the public been appraised of these facts, the ones you dare not deny, only fools.....raise your paw......would have defended, much less voted for  Führer Franklin.


These facts.

1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin


2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations


3. He extended the Depression by years.


4. He disposed of the Constitution


5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal


6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.


7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.


8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War


*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*


10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?


And, he inspired lying Leftists like you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times, a record of what the American people believed. America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president. The military of that period trusted him.
> Not a lot of room for Republicans to make FDR into a communist, after Reagan said he voted for FDR four times.


----------



## regent

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam Hussein was elected many times. Does that mean YOU must accept him as a great leader?
Click to expand...

 No, and you should know that Saddam was not an American citizen.  I told you once that your history  was pretty sad and now I say it about your geography.  Might try the fascist thing again.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam Hussein was elected many times. Does that mean YOU must accept him as a great leader?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, and you should know that Saddam was not an American citizen. ......
Click to expand...


Who said that he was? Are you embarrassed that your 'reasoning' broke down so easily?


----------



## regent

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam Hussein was elected many times. Does that mean YOU must accept him as a great leader?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, and you should know that Saddam was not an American citizen. ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who said that he was? Are you embarrassed that your 'reasoning' broke down so easily?
Click to expand...

And King George III held his job for life.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam Hussein was elected many times. Does that mean YOU must accept him as a great leader?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, and you should know that Saddam was not an American citizen. ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who said that he was? Are you embarrassed that your 'reasoning' broke down so easily?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And King George III held his job for life.
Click to expand...



So did the vile fdr once he got a hold of the office.


----------



## mikegriffith1

regent said:


> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times, a record of what the American people believed. America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president. The military of that period trusted him.
> Not a lot of room for Republicans to make FDR into a communist, after Reagan said he voted for FDR four times.



A whole bunch of historians, including some liberal ones, have been tearing down the FDR myth and have been documenting some rather revolting facts about him, such as the fact that he directly caused the deaths of tens of thousands of Jews by refusing to allow more than a trickle of Jewish refugees into America, the fact that he caused millions--literally millions--of needless deaths in WWII by refusing to help the German resistance and by refusing to recognize the Badoglio government in Italy until it was too late, the fact that he held downright racist views about Jews and Asians, the fact that he sold out Eastern Europe to Soviet tyranny, the fact that he rejected Japan's peace offers that gave him everything he initially said he wanted, and the considerable evidence that he knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor and allowed it so that he could get America into WWII. 

FDR got elected in the first place by a series of one-off circumstances, and he got reelected during WWII because Americans were hesitant to change presidents during a war.


----------



## regent

mikegriffith1 said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times, a record of what the American people believed. America's historians added their opinion by selecting FDR as America's greatest president, and are still selecting him as the greatest president. The military of that period trusted him.
> Not a lot of room for Republicans to make FDR into a communist, after Reagan said he voted for FDR four times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A whole bunch of historians, including some liberal ones, have been tearing down the FDR myth and have been documenting some rather revolting facts about him, such as the fact that he directly caused the deaths of tens of thousands of Jews by refusing to allow more than a trickle of Jewish refugees into America, the fact that he caused millions--literally millions--of needless deaths in WWII by refusing to help the German resistance and by refusing to recognize the Badoglio government in Italy until it was too late, the fact that he held downright racist views about Jews and Asians, the fact that he sold out Eastern Europe to Soviet tyranny, the fact that he rejected Japan's peace offers that gave him everything he initially said he wanted, and the considerable evidence that he knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor and allowed it so that he could get America into WWII.
> 
> FDR got elected in the first place by a series of one-off circumstances, and he got reelected during WWII because Americans were hesitant to change presidents during a war.
Click to expand...

Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  There are books galore most written by reputable historians.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....



You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.


----------



## regent

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
Click to expand...

You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
Click to expand...



I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.


----------



## rightwinger

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when all is said and done, the American people elected FDR four times,.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saddam Hussein was elected many times. Does that mean YOU must accept him as a great leader?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, and you should know that Saddam was not an American citizen. ......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who said that he was? Are you embarrassed that your 'reasoning' broke down so easily?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And King George III held his job for life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So did the vile fdr once he got a hold of the office.
Click to expand...

His life was too short


----------



## regent

Unkotare said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
Click to expand...

I doubt it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
Click to expand...



Well....

a) if you are a student of history....
and
b) a lover of all things _Franklin Roosevelt.._...


....one would expect you to be able to deny/refute/dispute....this:

1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin


2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations


3. He extended the Depression by years.


4. He disposed of the Constitution


5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal


6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.


7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.


8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War


*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*


10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?




Maybe you shouldn't doubt his statement......


----------



## Unkotare

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
Click to expand...



Your doubt is wrong.


----------



## Picaro

regent said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
Click to expand...


Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Picaro said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
Click to expand...



"...he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents..."

So many lies, so short a post....where to begin

1. Republican Presidents were responsible for this:
*After the depression [1920-1921] the United States proceeded to enjoy the “Roaring Twenties,”* arguably the most prosperous decade in the country’s history. Some of this prosperity was illusory—itself the result of subsequent Fed inflation—but nonetheless the 1920–1921 depression “purged the rottenness out of the system” and provided a solid framework for sustainable growth."

The *conclusion seems obvious to anyone whose mind is not firmly locked into the Keynesian or monetarist framework: The free market works.*
The Depression You’ve Never Heard Of: 1920-1921 | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty




2. 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


FDR actually extended the Depression by years.



3. Food was never a problem in resource-rich America, and at no time was starvation a problem.....loss of liberty was. The Fascist President, Roosevelt wanted to be American's version of Mussolini, Hitler or Stalin.

Roosevelt and his 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)

"Rex Tugwell, FDR's economic adviser, 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 Perkins (Sec'y of Labor) 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."
(Better look up who Francis Perkins was, Libs....)


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



People were beginning to recognize *the fascist nature of the National Recovery Administration*(*NRA*), code when they saw *"... the jailing of a New Jersey tailor named Jack Magid, whose crime was pressing a suit for thirty-five cents when the code fixed the price at forty cents."*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkNRUeAN5Ks&feature=emb_title



No different than what any Fascist would do to his own citizens.




Have you ever read a book????

Do you know what a book is?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Picaro said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
Click to expand...



"...serving the Red Chinese..."

Had FDR not allowed Stalin to gain the atomic bomb, and the Democrats not withheld funds from Chiang Kai Shek, there would be no Red China

Harry Dexter White was one of the major Soviet spies that F. Delano Roosevelt was copacetic having in his administration, and allowed to dictate the foreign policy that preserved communism, and cost the United States some 416 thousand lives in WWII.




"The accusations against White revolve around four incidents with which White was involved.

· White was the real author of the Morgenthau plan to "turn Germany into a potato field," which when leaked, united non-Nazis with Nazis, stiffened resistance, and prolonged the war.

· White used his position in the Treasury Department to develop a hostile U.S. policy toward Japan. The reason was to distract Japan from their plans to attack the Soviet Union and draw the U.S. into the war as an ally with the Soviet Union. White was the author of an extreme ultimatum that Japan could not comply with in the days just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

· White delayed financial support mandated by law to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Chinese government causing the triumph of Mao Tse-Tung's Communist Chinese government.

· White was instrumental in handing over the Allied Military mark printing plates to the Soviets. This caused a $250,000,000 deficit in the occupational government budget paid out by the U.S. Treasury. This in effect amounted to the US taxpayer paying the salaries of Soviet occupation troops at a time when US/Soviet relations were deteriorating precisely because of the presence and behavior of Soviet occupation forces in Eastern Europe."
Harry Dexter White - Conservapedia




And had Democrat Bill Clinton not sold missile technology to the Red Chinese for campaign donations, we wouldn't have anything to fear.

Now.....what did Bill Clinton give the Chinese to engender the 'donations'???

*Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology*
As president, Bill Clinton essentially wiped out any strategic advantage the U.S. had by selling advanced U.S. missile technology to our enemy, the People’s Republic of China.

That “administration’s voluntary release of all the secrets of America’s nuclear tests, combined with the systematic theft of the secrets that were left as a result of its lax security controls, effectively wiped out America’s technological edge,” David Horowitz writes in the recently published, _The Black Book of the American Left Volume 7: The Left in Power: Clinton to Obama_.

“One of the key technological breaks China received, without having to spy to get it, was the deliverance of supercomputers once banned from export for security reasons,” writes Horowitz.

“Supercomputers underpin the technology of nuclear and missile warfare, and not only for firing and controlling the missiles. A supercomputer can simulate a nuclear test and is thus crucial to the development of nuclear warheads. But, according to a _Washington Post_ editorial: ‘In the first three quarters of 1998 nine times as many [supercomputers] were exported [to China] as during the previous seven years.’”

.... helped a company called Loral Space get seats on official trade missions. He reportedly convinced the Clinton administration to overrule national security officials in order win approval for a Loral deal that gave Red China critical missile technology. Loral’s chief executive officer became the Democratic National Committee’s largest donor ...."

Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology


Chinagate:
Attempts were made by *Communist China to funnel money to the Clinton campaign *and influence elections in 1996. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another *money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung,* is now in jail. The *funds came from divisions of the Chinese army*, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. This is the government of RED CHINA - definitely a serious matter. If any scandals do catch up with him, which probably will happen, this is by far the worst. Amidst the sex scandals another DNC fundraiser scandal, Johnny Chung, openly admitted to knowingly taking funds from the Chinese government. Chung also testified that *the DNC knew the source of this money was communist China. They accepted it anyway. *The money is said to have been funneled through Chinese government official Liu Chao-ying then Chung and then to the DNC. Even more revealing was that Liu Chao-ying, daughter of Liu Hauqing (recent head of the Chinese military and top official of the Chinese communist party) and a *Peoples Liberation Army and Chinese space agency official, attended a DNC fundraiser.* Here she was photographed with Clinton. Chung also visited the White House over 45 times. Chung took several thousand dollars from commies and contributed them to a partisan candidate for President of the United States and leader of the free world. Chung was only a powerful campaign contributer/supporter with ties to the DNC and White House. Johnny Chung testified under oath to Congress on his admitted relations with the Chinese Commies and the ties to the President. Ironically Chung is one of a very small number of people who had greater White House access than Monica Lewinsky! Chung is said to have made over 50 visits compared to Monica's 39! Even better, only a week later Charlie Trie entered a guilty plea for his fundraising crimes and agreed to talk with investigators! Who next? Well it happened to be John Huang! *Huang, another Clinton cronie, pled guilty to funneling Chinese funds less *than a week after Trie! Well, at least we know the commies endorse Bill Clinton for president.
The Clintongate Administration


----------



## PoliticalChic

Picaro said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Might want to read some history of the FDR period.  .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
Click to expand...



Speaking of Democrat traitors......

. What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Democrat Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> 
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...serving the Red Chinese..."
> 
> Had FDR not allowed Stalin to gain the atomic bomb, and the Democrats not withheld funds from Chiang Kai Shek, there would be no Red China
> 
> Harry Dexter White was one of the major Soviet spies that F. Delano Roosevelt was copacetic having in his administration, and allowed to dictate the foreign policy that preserved communism, and cost the United States some 416 thousand lives in WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The accusations against White revolve around four incidents with which White was involved.
> 
> · White was the real author of the Morgenthau plan to "turn Germany into a potato field," which when leaked, united non-Nazis with Nazis, stiffened resistance, and prolonged the war.
> 
> · White used his position in the Treasury Department to develop a hostile U.S. policy toward Japan. The reason was to distract Japan from their plans to attack the Soviet Union and draw the U.S. into the war as an ally with the Soviet Union. White was the author of an extreme ultimatum that Japan could not comply with in the days just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.
> 
> · White delayed financial support mandated by law to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Chinese government causing the triumph of Mao Tse-Tung's Communist Chinese government.
> 
> · White was instrumental in handing over the Allied Military mark printing plates to the Soviets. This caused a $250,000,000 deficit in the occupational government budget paid out by the U.S. Treasury. This in effect amounted to the US taxpayer paying the salaries of Soviet occupation troops at a time when US/Soviet relations were deteriorating precisely because of the presence and behavior of Soviet occupation forces in Eastern Europe."
> Harry Dexter White - Conservapedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And had Democrat Bill Clinton not sold missile technology to the Red Chinese for campaign donations, we wouldn't have anything to fear.
> 
> Now.....what did Bill Clinton give the Chinese to engender the 'donations'???
> 
> *Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology*
> As president, Bill Clinton essentially wiped out any strategic advantage the U.S. had by selling advanced U.S. missile technology to our enemy, the People’s Republic of China.
> 
> That “administration’s voluntary release of all the secrets of America’s nuclear tests, combined with the systematic theft of the secrets that were left as a result of its lax security controls, effectively wiped out America’s technological edge,” David Horowitz writes in the recently published, _The Black Book of the American Left Volume 7: The Left in Power: Clinton to Obama_.
> 
> “One of the key technological breaks China received, without having to spy to get it, was the deliverance of supercomputers once banned from export for security reasons,” writes Horowitz.
> 
> “Supercomputers underpin the technology of nuclear and missile warfare, and not only for firing and controlling the missiles. A supercomputer can simulate a nuclear test and is thus crucial to the development of nuclear warheads. But, according to a _Washington Post_ editorial: ‘In the first three quarters of 1998 nine times as many [supercomputers] were exported [to China] as during the previous seven years.’”
> 
> .... helped a company called Loral Space get seats on official trade missions. He reportedly convinced the Clinton administration to overrule national security officials in order win approval for a Loral deal that gave Red China critical missile technology. Loral’s chief executive officer became the Democratic National Committee’s largest donor ...."
> 
> Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology
> 
> 
> Chinagate:
> Attempts were made by *Communist China to funnel money to the Clinton campaign *and influence elections in 1996. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another *money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung,* is now in jail. The *funds came from divisions of the Chinese army*, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. This is the government of RED CHINA - definitely a serious matter. If any scandals do catch up with him, which probably will happen, this is by far the worst. Amidst the sex scandals another DNC fundraiser scandal, Johnny Chung, openly admitted to knowingly taking funds from the Chinese government. Chung also testified that *the DNC knew the source of this money was communist China. They accepted it anyway. *The money is said to have been funneled through Chinese government official Liu Chao-ying then Chung and then to the DNC. Even more revealing was that Liu Chao-ying, daughter of Liu Hauqing (recent head of the Chinese military and top official of the Chinese communist party) and a *Peoples Liberation Army and Chinese space agency official, attended a DNC fundraiser.* Here she was photographed with Clinton. Chung also visited the White House over 45 times. Chung took several thousand dollars from commies and contributed them to a partisan candidate for President of the United States and leader of the free world. Chung was only a powerful campaign contributer/supporter with ties to the DNC and White House. Johnny Chung testified under oath to Congress on his admitted relations with the Chinese Commies and the ties to the President. Ironically Chung is one of a very small number of people who had greater White House access than Monica Lewinsky! Chung is said to have made over 50 visits compared to Monica's 39! Even better, only a week later Charlie Trie entered a guilty plea for his fundraising crimes and agreed to talk with investigators! Who next? Well it happened to be John Huang! *Huang, another Clinton cronie, pled guilty to funneling Chinese funds less *than a week after Trie! Well, at least we know the commies endorse Bill Clinton for president.
> The Clintongate Administration
Click to expand...




PoliticalChic said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are the last person who should offer that advice, shameless apologist.
> 
> 
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Democrat traitors......
> 
> . What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Democrat Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
Click to expand...

Where does one get the book, "IT'S SAID"?


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...serving the Red Chinese..."
> 
> Had FDR not allowed Stalin to gain the atomic bomb, and the Democrats not withheld funds from Chiang Kai Shek, there would be no Red China
> 
> Harry Dexter White was one of the major Soviet spies that F. Delano Roosevelt was copacetic having in his administration, and allowed to dictate the foreign policy that preserved communism, and cost the United States some 416 thousand lives in WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The accusations against White revolve around four incidents with which White was involved.
> 
> · White was the real author of the Morgenthau plan to "turn Germany into a potato field," which when leaked, united non-Nazis with Nazis, stiffened resistance, and prolonged the war.
> 
> · White used his position in the Treasury Department to develop a hostile U.S. policy toward Japan. The reason was to distract Japan from their plans to attack the Soviet Union and draw the U.S. into the war as an ally with the Soviet Union. White was the author of an extreme ultimatum that Japan could not comply with in the days just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.
> 
> · White delayed financial support mandated by law to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Chinese government causing the triumph of Mao Tse-Tung's Communist Chinese government.
> 
> · White was instrumental in handing over the Allied Military mark printing plates to the Soviets. This caused a $250,000,000 deficit in the occupational government budget paid out by the U.S. Treasury. This in effect amounted to the US taxpayer paying the salaries of Soviet occupation troops at a time when US/Soviet relations were deteriorating precisely because of the presence and behavior of Soviet occupation forces in Eastern Europe."
> Harry Dexter White - Conservapedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And had Democrat Bill Clinton not sold missile technology to the Red Chinese for campaign donations, we wouldn't have anything to fear.
> 
> Now.....what did Bill Clinton give the Chinese to engender the 'donations'???
> 
> *Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology*
> As president, Bill Clinton essentially wiped out any strategic advantage the U.S. had by selling advanced U.S. missile technology to our enemy, the People’s Republic of China.
> 
> That “administration’s voluntary release of all the secrets of America’s nuclear tests, combined with the systematic theft of the secrets that were left as a result of its lax security controls, effectively wiped out America’s technological edge,” David Horowitz writes in the recently published, _The Black Book of the American Left Volume 7: The Left in Power: Clinton to Obama_.
> 
> “One of the key technological breaks China received, without having to spy to get it, was the deliverance of supercomputers once banned from export for security reasons,” writes Horowitz.
> 
> “Supercomputers underpin the technology of nuclear and missile warfare, and not only for firing and controlling the missiles. A supercomputer can simulate a nuclear test and is thus crucial to the development of nuclear warheads. But, according to a _Washington Post_ editorial: ‘In the first three quarters of 1998 nine times as many [supercomputers] were exported [to China] as during the previous seven years.’”
> 
> .... helped a company called Loral Space get seats on official trade missions. He reportedly convinced the Clinton administration to overrule national security officials in order win approval for a Loral deal that gave Red China critical missile technology. Loral’s chief executive officer became the Democratic National Committee’s largest donor ...."
> 
> Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology
> 
> 
> Chinagate:
> Attempts were made by *Communist China to funnel money to the Clinton campaign *and influence elections in 1996. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another *money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung,* is now in jail. The *funds came from divisions of the Chinese army*, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. This is the government of RED CHINA - definitely a serious matter. If any scandals do catch up with him, which probably will happen, this is by far the worst. Amidst the sex scandals another DNC fundraiser scandal, Johnny Chung, openly admitted to knowingly taking funds from the Chinese government. Chung also testified that *the DNC knew the source of this money was communist China. They accepted it anyway. *The money is said to have been funneled through Chinese government official Liu Chao-ying then Chung and then to the DNC. Even more revealing was that Liu Chao-ying, daughter of Liu Hauqing (recent head of the Chinese military and top official of the Chinese communist party) and a *Peoples Liberation Army and Chinese space agency official, attended a DNC fundraiser.* Here she was photographed with Clinton. Chung also visited the White House over 45 times. Chung took several thousand dollars from commies and contributed them to a partisan candidate for President of the United States and leader of the free world. Chung was only a powerful campaign contributer/supporter with ties to the DNC and White House. Johnny Chung testified under oath to Congress on his admitted relations with the Chinese Commies and the ties to the President. Ironically Chung is one of a very small number of people who had greater White House access than Monica Lewinsky! Chung is said to have made over 50 visits compared to Monica's 39! Even better, only a week later Charlie Trie entered a guilty plea for his fundraising crimes and agreed to talk with investigators! Who next? Well it happened to be John Huang! *Huang, another Clinton cronie, pled guilty to funneling Chinese funds less *than a week after Trie! Well, at least we know the commies endorse Bill Clinton for president.
> The Clintongate Administration
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Democrat traitors......
> 
> . What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Democrat Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does one get the book, "IT'S SAID"?
Click to expand...




I've always said you were clueless about what 'a book' is.....and it seems you don't mind proving it.


Now, what does "Where does one get the book, "IT'S SAID"?" have to do with the  post you linked to, dunce?


----------



## Picaro

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...serving the Red Chinese..."
> 
> Had FDR not allowed Stalin to gain the atomic bomb, and the Democrats not withheld funds from Chiang Kai Shek, there would be no Red China
> 
> Harry Dexter White was one of the major Soviet spies that F. Delano Roosevelt was copacetic having in his administration, and allowed to dictate the foreign policy that preserved communism, and cost the United States some 416 thousand lives in WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The accusations against White revolve around four incidents with which White was involved.
> 
> · White was the real author of the Morgenthau plan to "turn Germany into a potato field," which when leaked, united non-Nazis with Nazis, stiffened resistance, and prolonged the war.
> 
> · White used his position in the Treasury Department to develop a hostile U.S. policy toward Japan. The reason was to distract Japan from their plans to attack the Soviet Union and draw the U.S. into the war as an ally with the Soviet Union. White was the author of an extreme ultimatum that Japan could not comply with in the days just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.
> 
> · White delayed financial support mandated by law to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Chinese government causing the triumph of Mao Tse-Tung's Communist Chinese government.
> 
> · White was instrumental in handing over the Allied Military mark printing plates to the Soviets. This caused a $250,000,000 deficit in the occupational government budget paid out by the U.S. Treasury. This in effect amounted to the US taxpayer paying the salaries of Soviet occupation troops at a time when US/Soviet relations were deteriorating precisely because of the presence and behavior of Soviet occupation forces in Eastern Europe."
> Harry Dexter White - Conservapedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And had Democrat Bill Clinton not sold missile technology to the Red Chinese for campaign donations, we wouldn't have anything to fear.
> 
> Now.....what did Bill Clinton give the Chinese to engender the 'donations'???
> 
> *Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology*
> As president, Bill Clinton essentially wiped out any strategic advantage the U.S. had by selling advanced U.S. missile technology to our enemy, the People’s Republic of China.
> 
> That “administration’s voluntary release of all the secrets of America’s nuclear tests, combined with the systematic theft of the secrets that were left as a result of its lax security controls, effectively wiped out America’s technological edge,” David Horowitz writes in the recently published, _The Black Book of the American Left Volume 7: The Left in Power: Clinton to Obama_.
> 
> “One of the key technological breaks China received, without having to spy to get it, was the deliverance of supercomputers once banned from export for security reasons,” writes Horowitz.
> 
> “Supercomputers underpin the technology of nuclear and missile warfare, and not only for firing and controlling the missiles. A supercomputer can simulate a nuclear test and is thus crucial to the development of nuclear warheads. But, according to a _Washington Post_ editorial: ‘In the first three quarters of 1998 nine times as many [supercomputers] were exported [to China] as during the previous seven years.’”
> 
> .... helped a company called Loral Space get seats on official trade missions. He reportedly convinced the Clinton administration to overrule national security officials in order win approval for a Loral deal that gave Red China critical missile technology. Loral’s chief executive officer became the Democratic National Committee’s largest donor ...."
> 
> Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology
> 
> 
> Chinagate:
> Attempts were made by *Communist China to funnel money to the Clinton campaign *and influence elections in 1996. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another *money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung,* is now in jail. The *funds came from divisions of the Chinese army*, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. This is the government of RED CHINA - definitely a serious matter. If any scandals do catch up with him, which probably will happen, this is by far the worst. Amidst the sex scandals another DNC fundraiser scandal, Johnny Chung, openly admitted to knowingly taking funds from the Chinese government. Chung also testified that *the DNC knew the source of this money was communist China. They accepted it anyway. *The money is said to have been funneled through Chinese government official Liu Chao-ying then Chung and then to the DNC. Even more revealing was that Liu Chao-ying, daughter of Liu Hauqing (recent head of the Chinese military and top official of the Chinese communist party) and a *Peoples Liberation Army and Chinese space agency official, attended a DNC fundraiser.* Here she was photographed with Clinton. Chung also visited the White House over 45 times. Chung took several thousand dollars from commies and contributed them to a partisan candidate for President of the United States and leader of the free world. Chung was only a powerful campaign contributer/supporter with ties to the DNC and White House. Johnny Chung testified under oath to Congress on his admitted relations with the Chinese Commies and the ties to the President. Ironically Chung is one of a very small number of people who had greater White House access than Monica Lewinsky! Chung is said to have made over 50 visits compared to Monica's 39! Even better, only a week later Charlie Trie entered a guilty plea for his fundraising crimes and agreed to talk with investigators! Who next? Well it happened to be John Huang! *Huang, another Clinton cronie, pled guilty to funneling Chinese funds less *than a week after Trie! Well, at least we know the commies endorse Bill Clinton for president.
> The Clintongate Administration
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might partake of a little FDR history yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Democrat traitors......
> 
> . What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Democrat Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does one get the book, "IT'S SAID"?
Click to expand...


Apparently there are millions of copies up PC's ass; you just have to reach up there and grab one. It seems to be full of total bullshit, though, especially about the 1920's, and it contains a lot of hopping around and babbling about Clinton as well for some reason. I guess it's a lot more fun than reality, and the drugs are cheaper if they're made in a bathtub. Did you know a boom bubble in the price of a lot of watered stock and non-existent equity is 'great prosperity'?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Picaro said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> "...serving the Red Chinese..."
> 
> Had FDR not allowed Stalin to gain the atomic bomb, and the Democrats not withheld funds from Chiang Kai Shek, there would be no Red China
> 
> Harry Dexter White was one of the major Soviet spies that F. Delano Roosevelt was copacetic having in his administration, and allowed to dictate the foreign policy that preserved communism, and cost the United States some 416 thousand lives in WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The accusations against White revolve around four incidents with which White was involved.
> 
> · White was the real author of the Morgenthau plan to "turn Germany into a potato field," which when leaked, united non-Nazis with Nazis, stiffened resistance, and prolonged the war.
> 
> · White used his position in the Treasury Department to develop a hostile U.S. policy toward Japan. The reason was to distract Japan from their plans to attack the Soviet Union and draw the U.S. into the war as an ally with the Soviet Union. White was the author of an extreme ultimatum that Japan could not comply with in the days just prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.
> 
> · White delayed financial support mandated by law to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Chinese government causing the triumph of Mao Tse-Tung's Communist Chinese government.
> 
> · White was instrumental in handing over the Allied Military mark printing plates to the Soviets. This caused a $250,000,000 deficit in the occupational government budget paid out by the U.S. Treasury. This in effect amounted to the US taxpayer paying the salaries of Soviet occupation troops at a time when US/Soviet relations were deteriorating precisely because of the presence and behavior of Soviet occupation forces in Eastern Europe."
> Harry Dexter White - Conservapedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And had Democrat Bill Clinton not sold missile technology to the Red Chinese for campaign donations, we wouldn't have anything to fear.
> 
> Now.....what did Bill Clinton give the Chinese to engender the 'donations'???
> 
> *Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology*
> As president, Bill Clinton essentially wiped out any strategic advantage the U.S. had by selling advanced U.S. missile technology to our enemy, the People’s Republic of China.
> 
> That “administration’s voluntary release of all the secrets of America’s nuclear tests, combined with the systematic theft of the secrets that were left as a result of its lax security controls, effectively wiped out America’s technological edge,” David Horowitz writes in the recently published, _The Black Book of the American Left Volume 7: The Left in Power: Clinton to Obama_.
> 
> “One of the key technological breaks China received, without having to spy to get it, was the deliverance of supercomputers once banned from export for security reasons,” writes Horowitz.
> 
> “Supercomputers underpin the technology of nuclear and missile warfare, and not only for firing and controlling the missiles. A supercomputer can simulate a nuclear test and is thus crucial to the development of nuclear warheads. But, according to a _Washington Post_ editorial: ‘In the first three quarters of 1998 nine times as many [supercomputers] were exported [to China] as during the previous seven years.’”
> 
> .... helped a company called Loral Space get seats on official trade missions. He reportedly convinced the Clinton administration to overrule national security officials in order win approval for a Loral deal that gave Red China critical missile technology. Loral’s chief executive officer became the Democratic National Committee’s largest donor ...."
> 
> Flashback: Bill Clinton gave China missile technology
> 
> 
> Chinagate:
> Attempts were made by *Communist China to funnel money to the Clinton campaign *and influence elections in 1996. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another *money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung,* is now in jail. The *funds came from divisions of the Chinese army*, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. This is the government of RED CHINA - definitely a serious matter. If any scandals do catch up with him, which probably will happen, this is by far the worst. Amidst the sex scandals another DNC fundraiser scandal, Johnny Chung, openly admitted to knowingly taking funds from the Chinese government. Chung also testified that *the DNC knew the source of this money was communist China. They accepted it anyway. *The money is said to have been funneled through Chinese government official Liu Chao-ying then Chung and then to the DNC. Even more revealing was that Liu Chao-ying, daughter of Liu Hauqing (recent head of the Chinese military and top official of the Chinese communist party) and a *Peoples Liberation Army and Chinese space agency official, attended a DNC fundraiser.* Here she was photographed with Clinton. Chung also visited the White House over 45 times. Chung took several thousand dollars from commies and contributed them to a partisan candidate for President of the United States and leader of the free world. Chung was only a powerful campaign contributer/supporter with ties to the DNC and White House. Johnny Chung testified under oath to Congress on his admitted relations with the Chinese Commies and the ties to the President. Ironically Chung is one of a very small number of people who had greater White House access than Monica Lewinsky! Chung is said to have made over 50 visits compared to Monica's 39! Even better, only a week later Charlie Trie entered a guilty plea for his fundraising crimes and agreed to talk with investigators! Who next? Well it happened to be John Huang! *Huang, another Clinton cronie, pled guilty to funneling Chinese funds less *than a week after Trie! Well, at least we know the commies endorse Bill Clinton for president.
> The Clintongate Administration
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've studied more of the actual history than you ever will, nuthugger.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of people squatting in America are pissed off the U.S. defeated Japan and Hitler, and especially pissed off he kept food on some peoples' tables through a horrible Depression created by Wall Street and a string of Republican Presidents, so they invent all kinds of idiotic rubbish to smear successful Presidents they've been told to smear by some criminal syndicate or other. This is why the right wing nutjobs are so important to Democrats getting control of the House; I've always suspected they're just Democrats running false flag operations to make sure all the nutjobs are working for the same goal, serving the Red Chinese and Wall Street. Things keep going the way they are, we'll be able to sell American children to middle class Red Chinese Cadre families as housepets for their children. What kid wouldn't enjoy laughing at a defective animal like Unkotare, for instance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Democrat traitors......
> 
> . What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by Democrat Obama's guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does one get the book, "IT'S SAID"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently there are millions of copies up PC's ass; you just have to reach up there and grab one. It seems to be full of total bullshit, though, especially about the 1920's, and it contains a lot of hopping around and babbling about Clinton as well for some reason. I guess it's a lot more fun than reality, and the drugs are cheaper if they're made in a bathtub.
Click to expand...



One of my many gifts, it appears, is getting under the scales of low-life lying Democrat apologists like you, simply by providing the truth.


Every one of my posts is linked, sourced, and documented....in short, 100% accurate and correct.

Check the links, and accept the education I provide.


----------



## initforme

Reagan was all in for corporations though.  He was not in favor of laborers.   He followed the $$$$


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> And now for the education that government schooling skipped.
> 
> *Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan,  venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.*
> 
> 
> 1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
> It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze *what happened....and why*.
> 
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?
> 
> It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
> Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?
> 
> 
> 
> 3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see *what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.*
> Apply same to FDR: *was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism*, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?
> 
> 
> Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
> Here is his timeline of political education..
> 
> Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.
> 
> In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President  Woodrow Wilson.
> 
> 1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.
> 
> Nov 6, 1928  Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.
> 
> Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932  Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.
> 
> On _*November 16, 1933*_, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.
> 
> 
> 
> So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.
> 
> He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
> It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched  Bolsheviks.
> 
> 
> What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?


----------



## PoliticalChic

initforme said:


> Reagan was all in for corporations though.  He was not in favor of laborers.   He followed the $$$$



Nonsense.



The benefits from Reaganomics:
The economy grew at a 3.4% average rate…compared with 2.9% for the previous eight years, and 2.7% for the next eight.(Table B-4)
Inflation rate dropped from 12.5% to 4.4%. (Table B-63)
Unemployment fell to 5.5% from 7.1% (Table B-35)
Prime interest rate fell by one-third.(Table B-73)
The S & P 500 jumped 124% (Table B-95)             http://www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/tables10.html
Charitable contributions rose 57% faster than inflation.  Dinesh D’Souza, “Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary May Became an Extraordinary Leader,” p. 116  



b. and c. Kiva Lending Team: Team REAL Americans | Kiva



While the ranks of the wealthy quickly multiplied, middle-class investors also entered the stock market in rapidly growing numbers. The creation by Congress in 1978 of the 401(k) tax-deferred retirement plan provided new incentives for workers to invest their savings in the stock market (often through mutual funds) rather than relying on company-funded pensions for retirement. The 401(k) led to a kind of democratization of Wall Street, as the percentage of American households owning some stake in the stock market—either directly or through mutual funds—shot quickly from 15.9% in 1983 to 29.6% in 1989.23 Thus the great bull market of the 1980s created more wealth, for more American families, than any previous boom in history.

 Investment Company Institute, "Equity Ownership in America, 2005," http://www.ici.org/pdf/rpt_05_equity_owners.pdf,

The Reagan Era Learning Guide: Citations


----------



## regent

Yep, Reagan voted for FDR four times in a row. When Reagan became president he was cited 225 times for wrong-doing


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> Yep, Reagan voted for FDR four times in a row. When Reagan became president he was cited 225 times for wrong-doing




That's a single vote.

He learned, and left the socialist...er, Democrats.

Perhaps he recognized the following.

1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin


2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations


3. He extended the Depression by years.


4. He disposed of the Constitution


5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal


6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.


7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.


8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War


*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*


10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?









If only Roosevelt had a mind of his own, and had, as his priority, what was good for America and Americans.

1. He would have recognized how evil Stalin and communism is/was.

2. He would have done what the experts advised, and made certain that Hitler and Stalin destroyed each other.

3. He would have given the anti-Nazi Germans the same support he gave the resistance in every other nation.

4. The war would have ended some 3-5 years earlier, with a half million fewer American casualties.

5.Both Nazi and Marxist butchers would have received their due justice.

6. No 'Cold War.'

7. The Constitution would be our 'law of the land.'


It appears that you, also, recognize the above as facts...but you don't have the courage that Reagan had.


----------



## regent

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, Reagan voted for FDR four times in a row. When Reagan became president he was cited 225 times for wrong-doing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a single vote.
> 
> He learned, and left the socialist...er, Democrats.
> 
> Perhaps he recognized the following.
> 
> 1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin
> 
> 
> 2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations
> 
> 
> 3. He extended the Depression by years.
> 
> 
> 4. He disposed of the Constitution
> 
> 
> 5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal
> 
> 
> 6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.
> 
> 
> 7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.
> 
> 
> 8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War
> 
> 
> *9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*
> 
> 
> 10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If only Roosevelt had a mind of his own, and had, as his priority, what was good for America and Americans.
> 
> 1. He would have recognized how evil Stalin and communism is/was.
> 
> 2. He would have done what the experts advised, and made certain that Hitler and Stalin destroyed each other.
> 
> 3. He would have given the anti-Nazi Germans the same support he gave the resistance in every other nation.
> 
> 4. The war would have ended some 3-5 years earlier, with a half million fewer American casualties.
> 
> 5.Both Nazi and Marxist butchers would have received their due justice.
> 
> 6. No 'Cold War.'
> 
> 7. The Constitution would be our 'law of the land.'
> 
> 
> It appears that you, also, recognize the above as facts...but you don't have the courage that Reagan had.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that Reagan had courage? I don't think anyone ever accused Reagan of having courage. Come to think of it, no one has ever accused  Trump of having courage either.


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, Reagan voted for FDR four times in a row. When Reagan became president he was cited 225 times for wrong-doing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a single vote.
> 
> He learned, and left the socialist...er, Democrats.
> 
> Perhaps he recognized the following.
> 
> 1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin
> 
> 
> 2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations
> 
> 
> 3. He extended the Depression by years.
> 
> 
> 4. He disposed of the Constitution
> 
> 
> 5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal
> 
> 
> 6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.
> 
> 
> 7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.
> 
> 
> 8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War
> 
> 
> *9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*
> 
> 
> 10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If only Roosevelt had a mind of his own, and had, as his priority, what was good for America and Americans.
> 
> 1. He would have recognized how evil Stalin and communism is/was.
> 
> 2. He would have done what the experts advised, and made certain that Hitler and Stalin destroyed each other.
> 
> 3. He would have given the anti-Nazi Germans the same support he gave the resistance in every other nation.
> 
> 4. The war would have ended some 3-5 years earlier, with a half million fewer American casualties.
> 
> 5.Both Nazi and Marxist butchers would have received their due justice.
> 
> 6. No 'Cold War.'
> 
> 7. The Constitution would be our 'law of the land.'
> 
> 
> It appears that you, also, recognize the above as facts...but you don't have the courage that Reagan had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What evidence do you have that Reagan had courage? I don't think anyone ever accused Reagan of having courage. Come to think of it, no one has ever accused  Trump of having courage either.
Click to expand...




PopQuiz: 
Which one doesn’t belong: 

Kim Philby; 

Franklin Roosevelt

Judas Iscariot; 

Benedict Arnold?  





Just kiddin’- all four belong...all four are traitors....they all sold out to the enemy.


----------



## Picaro

initforme said:


> Reagan was all in for corporations though.  He was not in favor of laborers.   He followed the $$$$



Reagan was a joke President; most of his policies were mere extensions of Carter's, and his much praised 'Reaganomics' was tossed under the bus by Volcker in less than a year after his first election. Taxes on the lower economic classes were raised 8 times, and Wall Street was allowed to concentrate corporate power without any worries about anti-trust actions, and of course banks were allowed to operate pyramid schemes and Ponzi schemes in the real estate markets without having to worry about getting arrested either. Like all 'free market 'bubbles, the taxpayers and small investors were stuck with the bills and eating the losses for the bankruptcies and failures , same as always.


----------



## Picaro

regent said:


> Yep, Reagan voted for FDR four times in a row. When Reagan became president he was cited 225 times for wrong-doing



He gave guns to the Iranian terrorist regime to get the hostages freed, despite American policy being not to make deals with terrorists, for one.


----------



## regent

So FDR remains America' greatest president. Wonder what FDR's greatest achievement was? Was it rebuilding America's infrastructure, the victory of WWII, the feeding of millions of Americans that could not find jobs or food. Then again maybe it was getting teenagers off the highways in their hunt for jobs?  To my dad the greatest thing FDR did was when my dad went to the bank to draw out funds so we might eat, FDR had fixed the bank so it  had money to let depositors  draw some of their savings out.             r, 
But I tire' or I could fill a book or two.


----------



## Unkotare

fdr was the worst scumbag to ever soil the office of President of the United States of America.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Picaro said:


> initforme said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was all in for corporations though.  He was not in favor of laborers.   He followed the $$$$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reagan was a joke President; most of his policies were mere extensions of Carter's, and his much praised 'Reaganomics' was tossed under the bus by Volcker in less than a year after his first election. Taxes on the lower economic classes were raised 8 times, and Wall Street was allowed to concentrate corporate power without any worries about anti-trust actions, and of course banks were allowed to operate pyramid schemes and Ponzi schemes in the real estate markets without having to worry about getting arrested either. Like all 'free market 'bubbles, the taxpayers and small investors were stuck with the bills and eating the losses for the bankruptcies and failures , same as always.
Click to expand...




"Reagan was a joke President; most of his policies were mere extensions of Carter's,"

That's all anyone need read of yours to understand how bereft of both education and knowledge, you are.


Don't every change.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Picaro said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, Reagan voted for FDR four times in a row. When Reagan became president he was cited 225 times for wrong-doing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He gave guns to the Iranian terrorist regime to get the hostages freed, despite American policy being not to make deals with terrorists, for one.
Click to expand...




Defeated the world's only other superpower without firing a shot.

Should you ever get around to reading......







One Liberal wrote this in a recent article in the WSJ:

"It is time to admit that American liberalism is in deep crisis: a crisis of imagination and ambition on our side, a crisis of attachment and trust on the side of the wider public.
Ronald Reagan almost single-handedly destroyed the New Deal vision of America that used to guide us."
The Liberal Crackup


Let's go over the reasons for this.

They...Liberals, Democrats, Socialists, Marxists.... *so very much want communism* to be correct and successful, that the Left's pundits both ignore the truth, and lie about it.


1. "...Western leftists [suffered from] an intellectual disability when they gazed upon the Soviet Union....they failed to notice *the transformation of their own...economies by Reaganism..*..

Almost all the intellectual energy of ....leftists was spent in attempting to demonstrate the failure of [Reagan's] policies by criteria that were short-term, parochial, and irrelevant to the dramatic character of the economic changes that [Reagan's policies produced]." 
John O'sullivan, "The *President*, the Pope, and the Prime Minister: Three Who Changed the World," p.257-258



2.* One cannot help but laugh *when reading the prognostications, predictions, pronouncements from one Leftist after another.... John Kenneth Galbraith, Lester Thurow, Paul Samuelson*, *Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Seweryn Bialer, Strobe Talbott.....one after another *praising the success of the USSR, and claiming how tales of impending demise were simply untrue.*

And this...*.right up to a year before the Soviet collapse!!!*


----------

