Thank you FDR

[Vandalshandle]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

O.K.

By the same token....

Ronald Reagan took office as the economy was tanking.

He hardly campaigned in 1984 and almost totally swept his opponent.

If he could have run in 1988....No problem.

The U.S. had one of it's longest expansions following his presidency.

I guess he rates too.

Or did you want to rethink that ?

Not particularly.

 

[gipper]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

Utter bullshit.

 

[gipper]

I'm sorry.

Did you think that that the first question has any bearing on my comment ?

Please rub the sleep out of your eyes.

As to your next question, who cares. It really has no bearing on the accusation that FDR purposely tried to pack the court in order to influence it's outcome.

Then, of course, you have the somewhat disputed "switch in time that saved nine".

There was nothing illegal nor immoral in FDR asking for a new makeup of the Court, it had been changed six times before FDR asked for a seventh change. Congress did not pass the request so what was the damage to the nation? And with the stitch it was of little damage to FDR's programs.

You bet....

As former Chief Justice William Rehnquist observed:

“ President Roosevelt lost the Court-packing battle, but he won the war for control of the Supreme Court ... not by any novel legislation, but by serving in office for more than twelve years, and appointing eight of the nine Justices of the Court. In this way the Constitution provides for ultimate responsibility of the Court to the political branches of government. [Yet] it was the United States Senate - a political body if there ever was one - who stepped in and saved the independence of the judiciary ... in Franklin Roosevelt's Court-packing plan in 1937".

Even his own party turned on him on this one.

But you keep believing that.

But again where was the Court ever given the power to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional?

Why would I answer that ?

It has no bearing on my claims.

Obviously Roosevelt had an answer...he was pissed at the court for blocking his New Deal legislation.

You want to argue Marbury v. Madison...start another thread. I'd be happy to join in.

If the Court had no Constitutional power to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional, FDR would not have been trying to pack the Supreme Court. It's a package thing,

Justify FDR's court packing...silly. You would do well under a dictator.

 

[Vandalshandle]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

Utter bullshit.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I'm sorry.

Did you think that that the first question has any bearing on my comment ?

Please rub the sleep out of your eyes.

As to your next question, who cares. It really has no bearing on the accusation that FDR purposely tried to pack the court in order to influence it's outcome.

Then, of course, you have the somewhat disputed "switch in time that saved nine".

There was nothing illegal nor immoral in FDR asking for a new makeup of the Court, it had been changed six times before FDR asked for a seventh change. Congress did not pass the request so what was the damage to the nation? And with the stitch it was of little damage to FDR's programs.

You bet....

As former Chief Justice William Rehnquist observed:

“ President Roosevelt lost the Court-packing battle, but he won the war for control of the Supreme Court ... not by any novel legislation, but by serving in office for more than twelve years, and appointing eight of the nine Justices of the Court. In this way the Constitution provides for ultimate responsibility of the Court to the political branches of government. [Yet] it was the United States Senate - a political body if there ever was one - who stepped in and saved the independence of the judiciary ... in Franklin Roosevelt's Court-packing plan in 1937".

Even his own party turned on him on this one.

But you keep believing that.

But again where was the Court ever given the power to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional?

Why would I answer that ?

It has no bearing on my claims.

Obviously Roosevelt had an answer...he was pissed at the court for blocking his New Deal legislation.

You want to argue Marbury v. Madison...start another thread. I'd be happy to join in.

If the Court had no Constitutional power to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional, FDR would not have been trying to pack the Supreme Court. It's a package thing,

Uhm...yeah, I think I said that.

So what was the point of your question ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

O.K.

By the same token....

Ronald Reagan took office as the economy was tanking.

He hardly campaigned in 1984 and almost totally swept his opponent.

If he could have run in 1988....No problem.

The U.S. had one of it's longest expansions following his presidency.

I guess he rates too.

Or did you want to rethink that ?

Not particularly.

So, I'll take that to mean you think Reagan belonged up there with FDR.

 

[Vandalshandle]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

O.K.

By the same token....

Ronald Reagan took office as the economy was tanking.

He hardly campaigned in 1984 and almost totally swept his opponent.

If he could have run in 1988....No problem.

The U.S. had one of it's longest expansions following his presidency.

I guess he rates too.

Or did you want to rethink that ?

Not particularly.

So, I'll take that to mean you think Reagan belonged up there with FDR.

That would be an erroneous assumption on your part.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

O.K.

By the same token....

Ronald Reagan took office as the economy was tanking.

He hardly campaigned in 1984 and almost totally swept his opponent.

If he could have run in 1988....No problem.

The U.S. had one of it's longest expansions following his presidency.

I guess he rates too.

Or did you want to rethink that ?

Not particularly.

So, I'll take that to mean you think Reagan belonged up there with FDR.

That would be an erroneous assumption on your part.

Of course.

Blind partisanship would not allow you to apply that same criteria to a Republican.

Not that I think Reagan was all that great.

I'm more interested in the fools on this board who can't see past their partisan noses.

 

[Vandalshandle]

FDR took office during the worst depression in world history. He was elected 4 times, and had WW2 all but won on his death. At the end of his presidency, America was the largest, most prosperous, indeed, the only, super power in the world.

These three sentences alone make him one of history's most successful presidents.

O.K.

By the same token....

Ronald Reagan took office as the economy was tanking.

He hardly campaigned in 1984 and almost totally swept his opponent.

If he could have run in 1988....No problem.

The U.S. had one of it's longest expansions following his presidency.

I guess he rates too.

Or did you want to rethink that ?

Not particularly.

So, I'll take that to mean you think Reagan belonged up there with FDR.

That would be an erroneous assumption on your part.

Of course.

Blind partisanship would not allow you to apply that same criteria to a Republican.

Not that I think Reagan was all that great.

I'm more interested in the fools on this board who can't see past their partisan noses.

...and you assume that "blind partisanship" makes me think that Reagan was not a great president.

You seem to make a lot of assumptions, Sun....

 

[Friends]

The dilemma FDR faced was the question that many politicians in government were raising: are there saboteurs in the Japanese population? Either way it was a no-win proposition so it was played safe. We also know that there were many private enterprises urging the play-it-safe solution for their own benefit. Now that we know better, would we do it today?

Another problem Roosevelt faced is that there was probably overwhelming support for Japanese internment at the time. If he opposed that sentiment, and if Japanese immigrants or Japanese Americans engaged in major acts of sabotage it would have been bad for him when he needed broad popular support to direct the war effort.

 

[Unkotare]

Ralph Carr: Defender of Japanese Americans | Colorado Virtual Library

 

[gipper]

The dilemma FDR faced was the question that many politicians in government were raising: are there saboteurs in the Japanese population? Either way it was a no-win proposition so it was played safe. We also know that there were many private enterprises urging the play-it-safe solution for their own benefit. Now that we know better, would we do it today?

Another problem Roosevelt faced is that there was probably overwhelming support for Japanese internment at the time. If he opposed that sentiment, and if Japanese immigrants or Japanese Americans engaged in major acts of sabotage it would have been bad for him when he needed broad popular support to direct the war effort.

Mob rule!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

A lot of it was great!!! FDR was a awesome president.

Fuck small idiotic backwards government!

Liberals Hoover and FDR gave us 16 years of Depression and world War that killed 60 millon souls. By any standard it was 10 times worse than any other period in American history!

 

[regent]

A lot of it was great!!! FDR was a awesome president.

Fuck small idiotic backwards government!

Liberals Hoover and FDR gave us 16 years of Depression and world War that killed 60 millon souls. By any standard it was 10 times worse than any other period in American history!

And that may be the very reason historians rate FDR as America's best president. Of course over the years that rating will change, as it has changed.

 

[Indeependent]

A lot of it was great!!! FDR was a awesome president.

Fuck small idiotic backwards government!

Liberals Hoover and FDR gave us 16 years of Depression and world War that killed 60 millon souls. By any standard it was 10 times worse than any other period in American history!

As opposed to children and adults dying in factories?
But, then again, Portfolio Conservatives LOVE cheap labor, don't they?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And that may be the very reason historians rate FDR as America's best president.

the best because they caused 16 years of depression and world war????

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As opposed to children and adults dying in factories?

dear, under capitalism you have to provide the best jobs and products possible to survive, not the worst jobs possible.

Do you understand??

 

[Unkotare]

A lot of it was great!!! FDR was a awesome president.

Fuck small idiotic backwards government!

Liberals Hoover and FDR gave us 16 years of Depression and world War that killed 60 millon souls. By any standard it was 10 times worse than any other period in American history!

As opposed to children and adults dying in factories?
But, then again, Portfolio Conservatives LOVE cheap labor, don't they?

No more than hypocrite liberals do.

 

[Indeependent]

As opposed to children and adults dying in factories?

dear, under capitalism you have to provide the best jobs and products possible to survive, not the worst jobs possible.

Do you understand??

BS, and you know it.
FDR introduced the concept of treating people like human beings and Conservatives waited decades for Reagan to get rid of that factor.
A business has to provide a product that will be purchased; the product need not be better than the competition, IF there IS any competition.
Get your head out of your books.

 

[Unkotare]

FDR introduced the concept of treating people like human beings....

Oh, is that what he was doing when he threw innocent, loyal Americans into concentration camps? You just broke the Stupid-O-Meter.