Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ummm, there's too much pointing to Wallace being tied to the Soviets for me.Definitely, although probably 3.Wait...wasn't the 22nd Amendment passed in 1947? That would have been in the last term of FDR's Presidency had he lived right?
Wasn't it passed as a reaction to him being elected four times?
And there's an irony. FDR was personally and professionaly fine with the 1940 gop candidate Wilke, who had been a dem. Wilke was opposed to the pacifist non-interventionists, but he opposed parts of the New Deal he considered anti-business. After the election Wilke served as an FDR advisor and was point man on aid to Britain.
Ironically Wilke and his 1940 running mate McNary died in 1944, the same year as FDR. Had Wilke been healthy, FDR might not have felt compelled to run again, knowing that he was dying. And FDR axed Henry Wallace off the ticket for Truman, and Wallace was likely a Soviet asset, or at best friend.
Wilkie was a good man who would have done well. So was Wallace. Truman however was a disaster.
I'm not sure you can put Korea solely on Truman. The Dept of State was a clusterfuk in Asia. We should have done single payer back when politicans actually thought they had to balance budgets like real people.
Wasn't thinking specifically of Korea. I don't know of these supposed "ties to the Soviets". Declining to take part in a mass demonization isn't being "tied to" something. What after all would that make Truman on the other side of the coin? "Untied"?
Truman was an incurious little fart who was led around by the nose by bad influences like Jimmy Byrnes. His main objective seems to have been to prove himself a man to his father. Stop me if we've heard these traits somewhere else.
ummm, there's too much pointing to Wallace being tied to the Soviets for me.Definitely, although probably 3.Wait...wasn't the 22nd Amendment passed in 1947? That would have been in the last term of FDR's Presidency had he lived right?
Wasn't it passed as a reaction to him being elected four times?
And there's an irony. FDR was personally and professionaly fine with the 1940 gop candidate Wilke, who had been a dem. Wilke was opposed to the pacifist non-interventionists, but he opposed parts of the New Deal he considered anti-business. After the election Wilke served as an FDR advisor and was point man on aid to Britain.
Ironically Wilke and his 1940 running mate McNary died in 1944, the same year as FDR. Had Wilke been healthy, FDR might not have felt compelled to run again, knowing that he was dying. And FDR axed Henry Wallace off the ticket for Truman, and Wallace was likely a Soviet asset, or at best friend.
Wilkie was a good man who would have done well. So was Wallace. Truman however was a disaster.
I'm not sure you can put Korea solely on Truman. The Dept of State was a clusterfuk in Asia. We should have done single payer back when politicans actually thought they had to balance budgets like real people.
Wasn't thinking specifically of Korea. I don't know of these supposed "ties to the Soviets". Declining to take part in a mass demonization isn't being "tied to" something. What after all would that make Truman on the other side of the coin? "Untied"?
Truman was an incurious little fart who was led around by the nose by bad influences like Jimmy Byrnes. His main objective seems to have been to prove himself a man to his father. Stop me if we've heard these traits somewhere else.
Well he did have the good sense to go with Marshall and a theory of containing the Soviets. And not using the ABomb when only we had it.
I never thought him horrible, but maybe a bit overrated by the historians. And Ike is maybe underrated.
Hey lawyers aren't all Sociopaths! LOLShe is VERY ORDINARY ---with a very big ego.
For that reason, she does well in politics. Not
Immoral-----she is AMORAL She should have
gone to law school
Her ego is boundless though. Hopefully Crowley or someone will take her out in 20
Try listening to the words not the toneEvery time she speaks, she comes off sounding like a kid.
She makes the sophmoric sound like mature genuises.
Maybe democrats would have run a dead guy for his 5th term. Who knows?
Try listening to the words not the toneEvery time she speaks, she comes off sounding like a kid.
She makes the sophmoric sound like mature genuises.
I have, and much of the time she comes off as someone over her head.
She's a star now however, so regardless of what she says or does she'll likely be re-elected.
ummm, there's too much pointing to Wallace being tied to the Soviets for me.Definitely, although probably 3.
And there's an irony. FDR was personally and professionaly fine with the 1940 gop candidate Wilke, who had been a dem. Wilke was opposed to the pacifist non-interventionists, but he opposed parts of the New Deal he considered anti-business. After the election Wilke served as an FDR advisor and was point man on aid to Britain.
Ironically Wilke and his 1940 running mate McNary died in 1944, the same year as FDR. Had Wilke been healthy, FDR might not have felt compelled to run again, knowing that he was dying. And FDR axed Henry Wallace off the ticket for Truman, and Wallace was likely a Soviet asset, or at best friend.
Wilkie was a good man who would have done well. So was Wallace. Truman however was a disaster.
I'm not sure you can put Korea solely on Truman. The Dept of State was a clusterfuk in Asia. We should have done single payer back when politicans actually thought they had to balance budgets like real people.
Wasn't thinking specifically of Korea. I don't know of these supposed "ties to the Soviets". Declining to take part in a mass demonization isn't being "tied to" something. What after all would that make Truman on the other side of the coin? "Untied"?
Truman was an incurious little fart who was led around by the nose by bad influences like Jimmy Byrnes. His main objective seems to have been to prove himself a man to his father. Stop me if we've heard these traits somewhere else.
Well he did have the good sense to go with Marshall and a theory of containing the Soviets. And not using the ABomb when only we had it.
I never thought him horrible, but maybe a bit overrated by the historians. And Ike is maybe underrated.
I wouldn't say "horrible", I'd say "negligent".
Not entirely negative, he did tell the Brits to go pound sand when they came begging for a coup in Iran for their oil. But he just didn't understand the world enough to not be led into unsmart paths, to wit the whole Red Scare/McCarthyism daze, which arguably led to Vietnam among other things.
Try listening to the words not the toneEvery time she speaks, she comes off sounding like a kid.
She makes the sophmoric sound like mature genuises.
I have, and much of the time she comes off as someone over her head.
She's a star now however, so regardless of what she says or does she'll likely be re-elected.
