Skip to comments.'Raw Deal': Historian makes waves with scathing look at Franklin D. Roosevelt
Posted on 02/13/2011 8:06:53 AM PST by wizkid
Reporting from Dunwoody, Ga. For more than half a century, biographers have treated Franklin Delano Roosevelt with Rushmore-like reverence, celebrating the nation's 32nd president as a colossus who eased the agony of the Great Depression and saved democracy from Nazi Germany.
Which never sat right with historian Burton Folsom Jr.
Growing up in Nebraska, Folsom remembers, his dad, a savings and loan executive, griped about high taxes and Roosevelt's voracious ambition. FDR was dead, but his legacy deficit spending, an activist federal government, an expansive social safety net lived on.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I just finished reading Amity Shlaes “The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression” and Folsom Burton’s “New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR’s Economic Legacy Has Damaged America.” Both were real eye-openers about Roosevelt and the damage he caused this nation. I had no idea how responsible Roosevelt was for the pure, unvarnished hatred of private enterprise and the roots of Marxism in the Democrat party.
The last chapter of “New Deal or Raw Deal?” is especially good because it examines the question of why media and the academy fell in love with Roosevelt and burnished his reputation posthumously.
It was interesting that around 1936 about 45% of US adults viewed Roosevelt as a “dictator.”
I highly recommend these books if you want to understand the origins of the pathologies in the Democrat party.
And yet look at his electoral results. Some of the largest victories ever--again and again.
Anyway, give Woodrow Wilson some credit. The DEMs were already “progressive” nutcases before FDR took over.
Now we need a complete re-writing of the history texts and an extensive re-education of the populace... that should be easy enough... :\
Well, if the 45% are evenly dispersed, they will lose in most states.
He was known as "The American Mussolini." Even among his admirers.
For a more contemporary take read “The Roosevelt Myth” by John T Flynn.
New Deal or Raw Deal is an excellent book. FDR perfected vote buying. He controlled all the money and if you were running for Congress you only received campaign money if you supported Roosevelt. It has been the Dems playbook ever since. We need to stop the Dems from taking our money and using it against us.
Mark Barabak, intrepid journalist of the LA Times, relentlessly attacks all of those who would challenge the Socialist dogma that is today’s historical narrative. He doesn’t even consider what the book has to say until he has placed it and its author firmly in the camp of all that is evil in the world. He is writing, of course, about the extreme right wing who are too ignorant and uneducated to understand the sophisticated rendering of history by the intellectual elite.
When he does finally get to a review of the book, all he can say is something akin to: Why, we all know that the New Deal was a wonderful success, it’s beyond question. Except that the book does question it, and does it quite well. This book serves as a great warning for the New Deal II that’s going on in Washington now.
523-8. That's 98.5%-1.5%
FDR took 76% of FLA. 70% of VA. 73% of NC. 97% of MS. It was more competitive in the Northeast, but even there he took most states by 60-40 or better. He took the mountain states by closer to 70-30.
And his other victories were similarly massive.
I read about half the book. It was interesting, but not exactly a zippy page-turner, and I had to return it to the library. Plus, it was depressing.
This was at one point of time early in his tenure.
Likely the Dems saw the polls and ramped up the propoganda machine and never looked back. I wouldn't be surprised if the "October Surprise" was invented around this time.
FDR was a tyrannical lunatic. The idea that the stock market crash caused the great depression and the war ended it is laughable. FDR caused the great depression. We weren’t able to pull out of it until he was out of power (dead).
The book deals with that subject as well.
The author discusses how WPA and other monies were dispersed in critical swing states, how various departments used those funds to promote their chosen candidates and how those who were assigned jobs were expected to make contributions to the Democrats. They also tell of large amounts of cash dispersed or jobs offered in late September to October time frame, only to have those jobs go away in December.
I also suggest a reading of the book.
No it wasn't. He was running for a second term. That's hardly early. And he CRUSHED. Then he did something no one had done. He ran for a third term. The results?
Popular vote was 54-44. Electoral was 449-82 (84%-15%). Still massive. But wait! There's still more!
His 4th election...53-45 popular. Electoral 432-99.(81%-18%) Another massive landslide.
I'm not trying to defend the guy. I don't like him. But the guy was MASSIVELY popular. In terms of electoral politics, he's Babe Ruth. No one is better.
It is only when one of their saints is attacked that the scum of liberality even refer to re-writing History.
Roosevelt was an Elitist Socialist (socialism for thee, your Money for me).
The absolute power that FDR held was something to behold, so much so that he was able to cause the depression that began in 1929, three years before he took office.