Adam Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The History Channel special on FDR painted a very different picture of the Presidency of Franklin Roosevelt that what I heard before. Either they were extremely negative on him, or he was just about as bad a President as it seems Bush was. He had been blatantly lying about his intent to get into war for some time prior to entering the war, and avoided the segregation and lynching issues. To be honest, it was not a fun thing to watch. Opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The History Channel special on FDR painted a very different picture of the Presidency of Franklin Roosevelt that what I heard before. Either they were extremely negative on him, or he was just about as bad a President as it seems Bush was. He had been blatantly lying about his intent to get into war for some time prior to entering the war, and avoided the segregation and lynching issues. To be honest, it was not a fun thing to watch. Opinions? Yeah he was pretty much as bad as they say. History shows he forced Japans hand, played pretty loose with non-involvement in Europe, and let's not even discuss his domestic policies. people loved him as they got free handouts. Free money and benefits goes a long ways towards people overlooking obvious warts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 He brought the country out of much worse economic times than we have now, and led the country on a path to victory against much tougher enemies than we have now. Things got better under Roosevelt, things got worse under Bush. To compare the two is an insult to Roosevelt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 He brought the country out of much worse economic times than we have now, and led the country on a path to victory against much tougher enemies than we have now. Things got better under Roosevelt, things got worse under Bush. To compare the two is an insult to Roosevelt. The war got us out of the depression, not Roosevelt. Up until Pearl Harbor, all Roosevelt did was put multiple small bandages on the economy with all of his programs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Yeah he was pretty much as bad as they say. History shows he forced Japans hand, played pretty loose with non-involvement in Europe, and let's not even discuss his domestic policies. people loved him as they got free handouts. Free money and benefits goes a long ways towards people overlooking obvious warts. gee, who does that remind you of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 gee, who does that remind you of? The person I assume youre referring to has only been president for one day...so how exactly can anything remind you of his policies which dont exist yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The person I assume youre referring to has only been president for one day...so how exactly can anything remind you of his policies which dont exist yet? But he promised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The war got us out of the depression, not Roosevelt. Up until Pearl Harbor, all Roosevelt did was put multiple small bandages on the economy with all of his programs. The positive turnaround began in 1933 and continued with both industrial production and GDP reaching above pre-depression levels by 1937. The war just expanded an already growing economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The positive turnaround began in 1933 and continued with both industrial production and GDP reaching above pre-depression levels by 1937. The war just expanded an already growing economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The positive turnaround began in 1933 and continued with both industrial production and GDP reaching above pre-depression levels by 1937. The war just expanded an already growing economy. The economy crashed in 1937, with unemployment soaring from ~14% to 19% in a year, despite a five years of government spending at 40% of GDP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The economy crashed in 1937, with unemployment soaring from ~14% to 19% in a year, despite a five years of government spending at 40% of GDP. That whole history thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The positive turnaround began in 1933 and continued with both industrial production and GDP reaching above pre-depression levels by 1937. The war just expanded an already growing economy. Expanded growing economy , not until the war was over. Lets not forget because of the war gas rationing , butter and sugar rationing etc. Times were not good . No TV back then so most people did not even know that FDR was in a wheel chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 The war got us out of the depression, not Roosevelt. Up until Pearl Harbor, all Roosevelt did was put multiple small bandages on the economy with all of his programs. So are you saying that he was right to get in the war, even though he misled the country by saying he would- not passing judgment, just asking your opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The economy crashed in 1937, with unemployment soaring from ~14% to 19% in a year, despite a five years of government spending at 40% of GDP. It was a temporary 1 year drop, and then the recovery continued in 1938 and forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 It was a temporary 1 year drop, and then the recovery continued in 1938 and forward. So for Dems a one year drop is not their fault but if there happens to be a Rep in office a one year drop is their fault. Funny how that works out for you guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 So for Dems a one year drop is not their fault but if there happens to be a Rep in office a one year drop is their fault. Funny how that works out for you guys Who's fault would it be if an independent was in office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Who's fault would it be if an independent was in office? An independent in office?? We'll have a black, lesbian, bull dyke, baby killer as president before that ever happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 So for Dems a one year drop is not their fault but if there happens to be a Rep in office a one year drop is their fault. Funny how that works out for you guys It may have been his fault, but it was corrected while he was still president and before 1941. He didn't leave an economic mess for the next president to clean up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 It may have been his fault, but it was corrected while he was still president and before 1941. He didn't leave an economic mess for the next president to clean up. And what Communist Manefesto did you read that in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The History Channel special on FDR painted a very different picture of the Presidency of Franklin Roosevelt that what I heard before. Either they were extremely negative on him, or he was just about as bad a President as it seems Bush was. He had been blatantly lying about his intent to get into war for some time prior to entering the war, and avoided the segregation and lynching issues. To be honest, it was not a fun thing to watch. Opinions? I hate getting dimes in change. Don't equate Bush - Bush is a decent man with a good heart, who tried. That tv show was just the tip of the iceberg. You might also look into the dealings of Truman. Read books about both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts