Posted on 03/24/2005 6:05:23 PM PST by death2tyrants
But we have yet to see the cumulative damage of the Venezuela election, the NK deal, and who knows what Jimmy's up to next,lol.
My favoite FDR quote was his last in Warm Springs, GA:
"When this war is over, I'll be the most...ungh...powerful man...arrgh...in...the wo-rld...aaaaaaahhhhh..."
Actually, it was Yalta, not Tehran. And that was Churchill that made the 'percentages' deal, not FDR. I've see this arguement from the blame-America-first crowd, so it isn't new to me (keep in mind I think it is safe to assume that you are not part of this crowd, just anti-democrat, which I can respect, ;-) ), anyhow, the idea of removing the Red Army from eastern europe via diplomacy wasn't very realistic (this is, after all, Stalin they were dealing with), particularly when a war was still going on in SE Asia.
Your account has probably been banned by now, but on the off-chance it hasn't -- yeah, you missed my point. But that probably happens a lot to you.
You are right on Yalta. But on FDR and Churchill, I doubt it. Churchill was a conservative, you know. FDR was the other end of the spectrum. Which of the two was the most anti-communist? Please don't tell me FDR.
True. But the New Deal marches on, and by the time we see the cumulative results of Carter's folly it will have accumulated that much more.
Interesting post. Of course it must be taken in the context that FDR is the neocon George Washington.
Poor GWB is Charlie McCarthy in the lap of the neocon Edgar Bergens.
Banned? I don't understand. I thought this was America where "all men were created equal". You insinuate that leveling the classes was being a class warrior. That putting into place mechanisms that have undisputedly reduced poverty in America is being a class warrior. I disagree. I'm not a liberal. Neither am I a conservative. But I am a Christian and I'm just here to see what the Free Republic is all about. I make one post in defense of the equality of human beings in America and I'm in danger of being banned?
I might disagree with what you say but I'll die for your right to say it. Guess that sentiment doesn't resonate well here.
Great bunch of Americans you have here. I'm beginning to understand why only card carrying Republicans are allowed to attend speeches by our American president these days.
First of all, "leveling the classes" is so 1930s. Second, I think you're just looking for arguments, and I don't do flame wars.
Not to mention blatanly lying about not dragging us into foreign wars while plotting just that.
whatshisname
Since Mar 25, 2005
Signed up today to post that? Agent provacateur.
and, the Republicans, to their credit actually made this one of the centerpieces of their campaign against him. why is this to their credit?
because the nation was at war. and there were lots of problems on the battlefield. they could have attacked him on those issues but chose not to, realizing that it would have caused unnecessary divisions in the electorate, and realizing that there are always problems in wars, they chose the good of the nation above their personal ambitions.
something to think about and contrast to the situation today.
I think we should be making this world a safer place for our children, but not for our children's children, because frankly, I don't think children should be having sex...
> I curse the name of Franklin D. Roosevelt everytime I look at my Social Security card and the taxes they take out of my check.
Love it or hate it, Social Security has done more to reduce poverty and eliminate the scourge once known as poor houses than any other program ever instituted by our government. I honestly don't understand how good Christian people can be against it. Jesus said we should take care of the least of those amongst us. Social Security doesn't make a rich person out of anyone but it sure has kept many a grandmother and grandfather out of dire, abject poverty.
I'm appalled at the heartlessness expressed by many in this thread. There's plenty to be ticked off about in this world. But a program that keeps old people out of the poor house just isn't one of them folks. It might not be perfect, but I shudder to think what the world would be like without Social Security and the little bit of taxes it costs us to insure that old people aren't sleeping on the streets.
Get a heart, for Christ's sake.
And I do mean that literally.
>Signed up today to post that? Agent provacateur.
Nope. Signed up late last night to engage in informed, rational discussions.
boy, its tough to remember the details. Roosevelt was elected to the 3rd and then 4th term, and there was no constitutional limitation. all of the previous presidents had followed the example set by Washington, who, i think, decided to not run for a third term because of his belief that the Presidency should not become a life-time position even if it could be won in successive attempts. this precedent was broken by Roosevelt, who invoked the necessity of continuity of leadership during times of national crisis...rightly or not. i do not know if there was any kind of a deal made between the major parties to get the limitation amendment passed.
you have my interest, do you know the answer?
No, I don't know. All that I recall is that he made the Republicans nuts with his mouth and that was their payback. I bet trying to pack the court didn't help either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.