Where FDR Went Wrong

[NYcarbineer]

How does one measure the good in life? Does good consist only in a critical opinion of the other? Or does good consist in actions that make this journey through this often described vale of tears just a little nicer and easier? I can think of few acts that compare to the good of social security and the millions whose lives are just a little easier, and a little nicer. Humankind can look to Franklin Roosevelt for that act. How many acts come close to that one great act. None I can think of. If actions don't make things just a little better, what good are actions, what good are words. Words are often so empty of meaning. Words often consist in potential, someone has to bring them to life.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/307654-where-fdr-went-wrong-7.html#post7686105

Think of the advance in science that FDR gave us by infecting blacks with syphilis and leaving it untreated so we could watch them die slow, horrible unnecessary deaths

We owe FDR something for that

Herbert Hoover started that program in 1932.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I already addressed this. You have been reduced to rank dishonesty now.

What am I lying about?

You are being dishonest in trying to give the impression that I had not already addressed this false point you keep bringing up.

Most Republicans voted against the reparations/apology bill. That proves that conservatives supported the internment.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How does one measure the good in life? Does good consist only in a critical opinion of the other? Or does good consist in actions that make this journey through this often described vale of tears just a little nicer and easier? I can think of few acts that compare to the good of social security and the millions whose lives are just a little easier, and a little nicer. Humankind can look to Franklin Roosevelt for that act. How many acts come close to that one great act. None I can think of. If actions don't make things just a little better, what good are actions, what good are words. Words are often so empty of meaning. Words often consist in potential, someone has to bring them to life.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/307654-where-fdr-went-wrong-7.html#post7686105

"How does one measure the good in life?"

Well, Middy.....I can give you an opportunity to do just that.


1. Here is the plus side:
( 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?"
The 'Hundred Days' of F.D.R.


2. What you overlook is the cost:
Korean War, China handed over to Mao, Eastern Europe, $17 trillion in debt.....largely due to FDR's domestic policies......

.....and the destruction of the Constitution and America as it was designed by the Founders.




Weigh the two.

How can you possibly blame Mao's victory in China on FDR? Not to mention the Korean War.

Based on the significance of the issue, your query, and the education that you and editec so badly need, I would like to present the answer as an OP.


If it is alright with you, I'll use your question.
If you'd rather that I not provide attribution, let me know. Or....if you don't respond, I'll leave your name out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"How does one measure the good in life?"

Well, Middy.....I can give you an opportunity to do just that.


1. Here is the plus side:
( 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?"
The 'Hundred Days' of F.D.R.


2. What you overlook is the cost:
Korean War, China handed over to Mao, Eastern Europe, $17 trillion in debt.....largely due to FDR's domestic policies......

.....and the destruction of the Constitution and America as it was designed by the Founders.




Weigh the two.

How can you possibly blame Mao's victory in China on FDR? Not to mention the Korean War.

Based on the significance of the issue, your query, and the education that you and editec so badly need, I would like to present the answer as an OP.


If it is alright with you, I'll use your question.
If you'd rather that I not provide attribution, let me know. Or....if you don't respond, I'll leave your name out.

Why don't you just start here by first establishing that the United States had any legitimate business in meddling in the internal affairs of China in the first place.

 

[Unkotare]

What am I lying about?

You are being dishonest in trying to give the impression that I had not already addressed this false point you keep bringing up.

Most Republicans voted against the reparations/apology bill. That proves that conservatives supported the internment.

There you go being dishonest AGAIN (not to mention illogical). Go back and read my original reply to your misleading statement.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How can you possibly blame Mao's victory in China on FDR? Not to mention the Korean War.

Based on the significance of the issue, your query, and the education that you and editec so badly need, I would like to present the answer as an OP.


If it is alright with you, I'll use your question.
If you'd rather that I not provide attribution, let me know. Or....if you don't respond, I'll leave your name out.

Why don't you just start here by first establishing that the United States had any legitimate business in meddling in the internal affairs of China in the first place.

Can I assume that that non-response means that you'd rather not have you name mentioned....

....you must know the kind of spanking you'd be about to receive.


I'll give you a moment to think it over....

 

[OKTexas]

1. This guy I know went to a club, where he met a very attractive blonde. After a few drinks, they went back to his apartment, where, filled with anticipation, they wound up in bed. And he discovered that 'she' had a penis.

"I thought you wouldn't care." He did. His words to me: 'It's always somethin.'"





2. In a way, this is the problem with FDR's role in American history. Just like the blonde, he had a number of attractive features....but one glaring problem: a misunderstanding of geopolitical reality.
'It's always somethin.'"

a. That 'somethin' resulted in the United States becoming, for all intents and purposes, a vassal of the Soviet Union. It caused the Korean War. It is the reason that China became Maoist, with 75 million deaths. And if the United States ever goes to war with China....the 'somethin' will have been the provenance.

3. Roosevelt laughed off, literally, all of the revelations of Soviet agents in his administration. He never cared if his conversations were bugged by the Russians. He sent the USSR materials necessary to build the atomic bomb. One of his first official acts was the United States recognizing the Soviet Union, November 20th, 1933. The list of goes on and on, leading many to believe the was an agent of the Soviet Union.

That wasn't the case.






4. To understand what happened, recognize that a distinguishing characteristic of Liberals and Leftists is an aversion to acknowledging evil and its permutations, i.e., communism. Leftist believe that people are essentially good, and the result is the proclivity to appease evil and ignore the sad facts of life.
It is a form of child-like wishful thinking.
It infected all of FDR's policies.






5. Dennis J. Dunn writes in "Caught Between Roosevelt & Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," that FDR believed in a theory of convergence that applied to the USSR and the US, i.e., that capitalism and Communism would each take on characteristics of the other. They would converge. FDR's contribution toward convergence was expanding the powers and reach of centralized government.

a. Dunn explains FDR's thinking: convergence theory "held that Soviet Russia and the United States were on convergent paths, where the United States was moving from laissez-faire capitalism to welfare state socialism and the Soviet Union was evolving from totalitarianism to social democracy."

b. Since FDR himself had moved the United States from laissez-faire capitalism to welfare state socialism....well, FDR was half right.

But....if only one half is doing all the converging....it is simply capitulation.

6. And so, Dunn explains, FDR's dogmatic belief in a point of convergence up the road is what allowed Roosevelt to discount and overlook all the violent contradictory evidence, the spying, the manipulation, the justification for the brutality of genocidal famines and gulags and every act of police-state repression.

The theory is what made FDR, if not a participant, at least an accomplice.
In our name.






7. In memoirs, both Representative Martin Dies, [p. 144-148] an earlier incarnation of Senator Joseph McCarthy, and, on the other side, Roosevelt ally Cardinal Spellman, [p. 222-225] both describe conversations with Roosevelt in which he speaks of his belief in convergence of the two nations. Dunn describes an interview with Averell Harriman, in which Harriman "emphasized the importance of the theory of convergence in explaining Roosevelt's policies."




8. "Adopting the "pseudoprofound theory of convergence," Rooseveltians claimed that the Soviet Union "was moving ineluctably toward democracy" (pp. 3-4). The author alleges that "moral relativism" prompted Roosevelt to mislead the American public and ignore his foreign policy advisors in order to prove that Stalin was an evolving democrat, not "a genocidal megalomaniac guided by the higher power of revolutionary inevitability ..." (p. 4, 6).

In contrast, "Traditionalists" rejected the theory of convergence. ... they viewed Stalin as "a murderer, a liar, and a vicious opponent of the United States and of pluralism generally."...." Traditionalists wanted Roosevelt to compel the Soviets to adopt democracy and "the minimum standards of moral behavior that were outlined in the world's principal religions and moral codes." These pleas, however, went unheeded as Roosevelt remained intent on pursuing "his policy of uncritical friendship toward Stalin" (pp. 8-9)."
H-Net Reviews





Today, it seems we have so very many Leftists who are still enchanted with the blonde's better feature.....

...and are willing to ignore 'somethin'......

Only one thing to say, YEP.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How does one measure the good in life? Does good consist only in a critical opinion of the other? Or does good consist in actions that make this journey through this often described vale of tears just a little nicer and easier? I can think of few acts that compare to the good of social security and the millions whose lives are just a little easier, and a little nicer. Humankind can look to Franklin Roosevelt for that act. How many acts come close to that one great act. None I can think of. If actions don't make things just a little better, what good are actions, what good are words. Words are often so empty of meaning. Words often consist in potential, someone has to bring them to life.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/307654-where-fdr-went-wrong-7.html#post7686105

"How does one measure the good in life?"

Well, Middy.....I can give you an opportunity to do just that.


1. Here is the plus side:
( 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?"
The 'Hundred Days' of F.D.R.


2. What you overlook is the cost:
Korean War, China handed over to Mao, Eastern Europe, $17 trillion in debt.....largely due to FDR's domestic policies......

.....and the destruction of the Constitution and America as it was designed by the Founders.




Weigh the two.

How can you possibly blame Mao's victory in China on FDR? Not to mention the Korean War.

Here ya' go, boyyyyeeeee!!!


http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/308252-i-ve-been-challenged-by-fdr-groupies.html#post7695581

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. This guy I know went to a club, where he met a very attractive blonde. After a few drinks, they went back to his apartment, where, filled with anticipation, they wound up in bed. And he discovered that 'she' had a penis.

"I thought you wouldn't care." He did. His words to me: 'It's always somethin.'"





2. In a way, this is the problem with FDR's role in American history. Just like the blonde, he had a number of attractive features....but one glaring problem: a misunderstanding of geopolitical reality.
'It's always somethin.'"

a. That 'somethin' resulted in the United States becoming, for all intents and purposes, a vassal of the Soviet Union. It caused the Korean War. It is the reason that China became Maoist, with 75 million deaths. And if the United States ever goes to war with China....the 'somethin' will have been the provenance.

3. Roosevelt laughed off, literally, all of the revelations of Soviet agents in his administration. He never cared if his conversations were bugged by the Russians. He sent the USSR materials necessary to build the atomic bomb. One of his first official acts was the United States recognizing the Soviet Union, November 20th, 1933. The list of goes on and on, leading many to believe the was an agent of the Soviet Union.

That wasn't the case.






4. To understand what happened, recognize that a distinguishing characteristic of Liberals and Leftists is an aversion to acknowledging evil and its permutations, i.e., communism. Leftist believe that people are essentially good, and the result is the proclivity to appease evil and ignore the sad facts of life.
It is a form of child-like wishful thinking.
It infected all of FDR's policies.






5. Dennis J. Dunn writes in "Caught Between Roosevelt & Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," that FDR believed in a theory of convergence that applied to the USSR and the US, i.e., that capitalism and Communism would each take on characteristics of the other. They would converge. FDR's contribution toward convergence was expanding the powers and reach of centralized government.

a. Dunn explains FDR's thinking: convergence theory "held that Soviet Russia and the United States were on convergent paths, where the United States was moving from laissez-faire capitalism to welfare state socialism and the Soviet Union was evolving from totalitarianism to social democracy."

b. Since FDR himself had moved the United States from laissez-faire capitalism to welfare state socialism....well, FDR was half right.

But....if only one half is doing all the converging....it is simply capitulation.

6. And so, Dunn explains, FDR's dogmatic belief in a point of convergence up the road is what allowed Roosevelt to discount and overlook all the violent contradictory evidence, the spying, the manipulation, the justification for the brutality of genocidal famines and gulags and every act of police-state repression.

The theory is what made FDR, if not a participant, at least an accomplice.
In our name.






7. In memoirs, both Representative Martin Dies, [p. 144-148] an earlier incarnation of Senator Joseph McCarthy, and, on the other side, Roosevelt ally Cardinal Spellman, [p. 222-225] both describe conversations with Roosevelt in which he speaks of his belief in convergence of the two nations. Dunn describes an interview with Averell Harriman, in which Harriman "emphasized the importance of the theory of convergence in explaining Roosevelt's policies."




8. "Adopting the "pseudoprofound theory of convergence," Rooseveltians claimed that the Soviet Union "was moving ineluctably toward democracy" (pp. 3-4). The author alleges that "moral relativism" prompted Roosevelt to mislead the American public and ignore his foreign policy advisors in order to prove that Stalin was an evolving democrat, not "a genocidal megalomaniac guided by the higher power of revolutionary inevitability ..." (p. 4, 6).

In contrast, "Traditionalists" rejected the theory of convergence. ... they viewed Stalin as "a murderer, a liar, and a vicious opponent of the United States and of pluralism generally."...." Traditionalists wanted Roosevelt to compel the Soviets to adopt democracy and "the minimum standards of moral behavior that were outlined in the world's principal religions and moral codes." These pleas, however, went unheeded as Roosevelt remained intent on pursuing "his policy of uncritical friendship toward Stalin" (pp. 8-9)."
H-Net Reviews





Today, it seems we have so very many Leftists who are still enchanted with the blonde's better feature.....

...and are willing to ignore 'somethin'......

Let me clear the 'mud' out of the Augean-esque pile of words above.

'Convergence' is nothing more than the idea that somewhere between totalitarian communism and totalitarian capitalism

there is some sort of moderate, centrist, mix of the two, a happy medium if you will.

Of course to rightwingers who believe that the best symbol of how America has been destroyed is the Social Security check that goes into their grandmother's bank account every month,

'happy' is not the word they would use.

A herculean effort at clarifying it, NYC, thanks.

As you thanked Carby for his inaccuracy....

....here is your remediation as well:


http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/308252-i-ve-been-challenged-by-fdr-groupies.html#post7695581

 

[NYcarbineer]

"How does one measure the good in life?"

Well, Middy.....I can give you an opportunity to do just that.


1. Here is the plus side:
( 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?"
The 'Hundred Days' of F.D.R.


2. What you overlook is the cost:
Korean War, China handed over to Mao, Eastern Europe, $17 trillion in debt.....largely due to FDR's domestic policies......

.....and the destruction of the Constitution and America as it was designed by the Founders.




Weigh the two.

How can you possibly blame Mao's victory in China on FDR? Not to mention the Korean War.

Here ya' go, boyyyyeeeee!!!


http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/308252-i-ve-been-challenged-by-fdr-groupies.html#post7695581

So your answer is you can't. Of course you can't because your position is indefensible.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You are being dishonest in trying to give the impression that I had not already addressed this false point you keep bringing up.

Most Republicans voted against the reparations/apology bill. That proves that conservatives supported the internment.

There you go being dishonest AGAIN (not to mention illogical). Go back and read my original reply to your misleading statement.

And yet you claim that finding ONE Republican who opposed internment proves that conservatives opposed internment.

btw, did you know that FDR's attorney general opposed internment? I guess that proves that liberals opposed internment.

 

[Unkotare]

Most Republicans voted against the reparations/apology bill. That proves that conservatives supported the internment.

There you go being dishonest AGAIN (not to mention illogical). Go back and read my original reply to your misleading statement.

And yet you claim that finding ONE Republican who opposed internment proves that conservatives opposed internment.

You really need to work on your reading skills. Go back and read through the exchange again. Or are you being deliberately dishonest now - AGAIN?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How does one measure the good in life? Does good consist only in a critical opinion of the other? Or does good consist in actions that make this journey through this often described vale of tears just a little nicer and easier? I can think of few acts that compare to the good of social security and the millions whose lives are just a little easier, and a little nicer. Humankind can look to Franklin Roosevelt for that act. How many acts come close to that one great act. None I can think of. If actions don't make things just a little better, what good are actions, what good are words. Words are often so empty of meaning. Words often consist in potential, someone has to bring them to life.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/307654-where-fdr-went-wrong-7.html#post7686105

Think of the advance in science that FDR gave us by infecting blacks with syphilis and leaving it untreated so we could watch them die slow, horrible unnecessary deaths

We owe FDR something for that

Herbert Hoover started that program in 1932.

Yes and the patients were informed and, pay attention, they were treated!

FDR and his Nazi regime perverted the experiments by letting them go untreated and watching them suffer in slow horrible agonizing cruelty

I'm glad you brought up Hoover

 

[PoliticalChic]

How can you possibly blame Mao's victory in China on FDR? Not to mention the Korean War.

Here ya' go, boyyyyeeeee!!!


http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/308252-i-ve-been-challenged-by-fdr-groupies.html#post7695581

So your answer is you can't. Of course you can't because your position is indefensible.

I wiped the floor with you.


You couldn't find any error in the link that I provided....

...a brilliant thesis if I say so myself!

....the best you can do is shut your eyes real tight, and cover your ears.



I love it when I make you do that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here ya' go, boyyyyeeeee!!!


http://www.usmessageboard.com/history/308252-i-ve-been-challenged-by-fdr-groupies.html#post7695581

So your answer is you can't. Of course you can't because your position is indefensible.

I wiped the floor with you.


You couldn't find any error in the link that I provided....

...a brilliant thesis if I say so myself!

....the best you can do is shut your eyes real tight, and cover your ears.



I love it when I make you do that.

lol, you sound more like teapartysamurai every day.

This is the thread we are posting in. If you can't make your argument here, I'm assuming you have no argument.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There you go being dishonest AGAIN (not to mention illogical). Go back and read my original reply to your misleading statement.

And yet you claim that finding ONE Republican who opposed internment proves that conservatives opposed internment.

You really need to work on your reading skills. Go back and read through the exchange again. Or are you being deliberately dishonest now - AGAIN?

Did that misrepresent your position?

Let me restate it then. You posted the example of Ralph Carr as a Republican who opposed the internment,

BUT, you know full well that one anecdotal example does not prove any larger point.

Therefore your reference to that individual was pointless.

Better?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, well, well,

here's a very elaborate and spirited defense of the internment program, and guess from where?

The American Conservative

Intern(ment) Scandal | The American Conservative

Another good example of what appears to be widespread conservative support for the policy,

then and now. This one even includes a scathing attack on a Jimmy Carter commission...

...for not being nice enough to the pro-internment crowd.

 

[Unkotare]

And yet you claim that finding ONE Republican who opposed internment proves that conservatives opposed internment.

You really need to work on your reading skills. Go back and read through the exchange again. Or are you being deliberately dishonest now - AGAIN?

Did that misrepresent your position?

Let me restate it then. You posted the example of Ralph Carr as a Republican who opposed the internment,

BUT, you know full well that one anecdotal example does not prove any larger point.

Therefore your reference to that individual was pointless.

Better?

He opposed it on conservative, American principles that historically the Republican Party has stood for. FDR stole private property, oppressed, terrorized, and deprived innocent people - the majority US CITIZENS of their freedom and in several cases their lives. This is just what the democrat party has historically stood for. Are you getting this yet?

 

[regent]

All this work by conservatives trying to bring FDR down a peg or two, but for all their work, FDR retained his number one position. Since conservatives seem unable to lower FDR's position from first, perhaps conservatives should have worked on raising Bush's rating from fifth worst American president all the way up to sixth worst? Could it be done?

 

[percysunshine]

Ok.

Time to break up a few stereotypes, destroy some preconceived notions, and fry every ones frontal lobes a bit. A classic, unimpeachably conservative, columnists opinion of FDR;

Defaming FDR | National Review Online