FDR Democrats, check in here!

[MannyGoldstein]

Last edited Wed Apr 17, 2013, 10:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Anybody out there?

UPDATE @ 4/17 10:00 EDT: Holy cow! The New Deal still has some fans!

[tblue]

1. Here!

Hi Manny!

[hfojvt]

159. well that answers that question

although I notice that before I can watch this video, I am first bombarded with rightwing propaganda about bankrupting America with spending.

So it goes.

[trueblue2007]

339. RIGHT ON!!!! I SAY YES! FDR Democrats, check in here!

YOU. BETTER. BELIEVE. IT !!!

[michigandem58]

384. But FDR compromised !!!!!111111oneoneone

But in the first of many concessions to legislative realities, as well as to anxiety about constitutional challenges—not to mention apprehension about perceived legitimacy in the eyes of the people—FDR carved the jobs provision out of the big bill. It eventually passed as the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935. Among other things, it created the Works Progress Administration (WPA), an agency that employed millions in the Depression era but would disappear within less than a decade. More such concessions soon followed.

Compromise after compromise whittled FDR’s grand vision for a comprehensive system of social provision down to what Perkins later glumly appraised as but a few “practical, flat-footed first steps.” Yet those first steps have proved hugely consequential for generations of Americans—and their consequentiality may well be attributable to the very compromises that so dispirited Perkins. FDR’s shortfall explains much about the limits of reform in the New Deal era, as well as the enduring contours of American socioeconomics.

Perhaps the most notable compromise, in light of recent history, concerned health care. “Powerful elements of the medical profession were up in arms over the idea of any kind of government-endorsed system,” noted Perkins. Sticking with the health provisions threatened to jeopardize the entire bill, so FDR reluctantly let them go. The dream of universal health care lingered over an unreachable horizon for the remainder of the century and beyond. But as Perkins recognized, to get anything accomplished at all, FDR had to take account of “the prejudices of our people, and our legislative habits.”

http://www.americanheritage.com/content/new-deal-compromised

[MannyGoldstein]

395. First off, FDR compromised on how far to move *forward*

Last edited Wed Apr 17, 2013, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)

"We got less than we hoped for" is a whole different thing than "we could have lost even more ground".

Second, health care was something like 2% of GDP back then, not 16% like now. A relatively small concession.

[L0oniX]

449. This ^^^^^^^^^^^

[sueh]

2. Checking in, MannyGoldstein. I'm still here!

[MNBrewer]

3. Present!

Accounted for? Maybe not

[TDale313]

4. Here :-)

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. Here!

[840high]

6. Present.

[Luminous Animal]

7. Checking in.

[NRaleighLiberal]

8. yes, here, here!

I guess I am also a Bernie Sanders socialist!

[DearHeart]

9. Here! But, not many of us left!

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Most Americans are FDR Democrats

They like all the policies, but don't associate the policies with the man (or, more accurately, with the movement he led).

[DearHeart]

20. True.

Although, lately here on DU, it doesn't seem like there are many of us left.

[MannyGoldstein]

31. Well, I'm *hoping* this thread makes a point...

I think that most of us are, particularly after the latest steaming pile of Social Security "strengthening" attempt or whatever they're calling it these days.

[In Truth We Trust]

94. Love your dedication Manny. Thanks for "speaking" the truth. It is appreciated by this FDR admirer.

[BlueCaliDem]

231. And as a HUGE fan of FDR, you, of course know, that he was AGAINST

Last edited Wed Apr 17, 2013, 02:06 PM - Edit history (1)

social security as a welfare program and 100% against MEN ever collecting Social Security, right? RIGHT?? Your hero believed that men should work until they drop and pay into the insurance program that would help their widows and children, not them. Good thing that was amended and strengthened over the years, huh, Manny?

And you know his Secretary of Labor, Francis Perkins - the brains and brawn behind Social Security - has always contended that Social Security to be amended, amended, amended. Didn't you see Lawrence O'Donnell's show last *Wednesday and Thursday that highlighted the truth Liberals like you refuse to see?

Ugh. Some self-proclaimed Dems really aren't that informed about their heroes when they wax romantically about them LONG after they're gone.

[MannyGoldstein]

283. Are you stating that SS didn't originally cover men?

Let's take your concerns one at a time, OK?

[BlueCaliDem]

295. FDR

was vehemently against covering men in Social Security. That's the person you're making a saint of here, right? Yes, he hated the idea of men being "on the dole".

I gather you didn't see Lawrence O'Donnell's Wednesday and Thursday "Rewrite" segments {I got the days wrong in my previous post and will correct it}. You can find it at this link: http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/04/11/what-would-frances-perkins-think-of-the-current-social-security-debate/

I'm sorry this took so long. I had to look up the time-frame in the video to answer your question. Time-frame to answer your question is at 5:55. It was Francis Perkins who admitted it. But I would advise you to look at the entire clip.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

301. You have stated it wrong. At best, the video shows that FDR was opposed to the dole, not as you say

"FDR was vehemently against covering men in Social Security."

[BlueCaliDem]

432. I was referring to the welfare aspect of today's Social Security.

And he would be vehemently against it. You do know that people take out more out of Social Security than they put in, right?

Anyway, Roosevelt would side with President Obama today in trying to tweak the COLA because there wasn't even a COLA until 1975, and COLA is a cost of living adjustment by the government rather than money that had been paid into the fund by the recipient. That's welfare and that's what President Roosevelt would see as "the dole" that he so despised.

So no, I'm no FDR Democrat. I am, however, a Francis Perkins Democrat. Just like President Obama, Francis Perkins, too, was a community organizer for the poor and destitute.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

437. "was" versus "would be" or "might be"

So "was" was not literally true?

Got it.

[BlueCaliDem]

439. Okay. So you're just trying for cheap shots and "gotchas".

And here I thought you were at least trying to be serious. My bad.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

442. either that or expecting the literal truth.

[MannyGoldstein]

303. When FDR signed SS, did it cover men?

Simple question, I think.

[MannyGoldstein]

417. FDR was against men getting *welfare*

*Welfare*. Not retirement benefits.

This has been my understanding since I read up on FDR, and is confirmed by the video you linked to.

FDR started his presidency as a fiscal conservative, of sorts - he was open to experimenting with both leftist and rightist policies in an effort to find out what worked, because he knew that nobody knew the answer. Experiment, push on with the successes and kill the failures.

But it turned out that Liberal policies worked, while Conservative policies failed. So being a pragmatist above all other things, FDR became quite the Liberal over time.

[BlueCaliDem]

430. FDR was against any man "on the dole". He believed that the welfare aspect of S.S.

should only be limited to women and children. He was vehemently against men being on the "dole", as Francis Perkins reiterated in her speech. IF he was becoming more liberal, it's thanks to her, not him. And guess what? Before she was tapped to be his Labor Secretary, Ms. Perkins was a community organizer just like President Obama.

As you know, people usually use up every penny they have contributed to social security sometime after they start receiving it. After that, it becomes welfare, i.e., taking out more than we've put in - and FDR was *against* men doing that. This is the reason why the Rightwing can label this program as an "entitlement" rather than earned benefits.

"Many people wonder if they will get back at least the amount they contributed in retirement. The answer largely depends on when you retire and how much you've earned over your lifetime. Consider a single man who earns the average wage throughout his career ($43,100 in 2010 dollars), works every year from age 22 to 64, and then retires at age 65 in 2010. Over his lifetime he has paid $345,000 into the system. But he is likely to get back $72,000 more than that, or $417,000 in Social Security and Medicare payouts, according to recent Urban Institute calculations. A single women with the same work and tax history will come out even further ahead due to her longer life expectancy, likely netting $464,000 in lifetime benefits, which is $192,000 more than she paid into the system. These amounts are in constant 2010 dollars and assume a 2 percent real interest rate."
http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2011/01/06/will-you-get-back-your-social-security-taxes-in-retirement

This president is not trying for gender discrimination. He's trying his damnedest to keep social security solvent, and I'm really sick and tired of hearing those who should support him, excoriate him for it while hailing FDR, or Carter, or Clinton or even Tip O'Neil as some saints and defenders of Social Security when what they'd done was FAR WORSE. Outside FDR's thoughts on "the dole", Carter, Clinton, and Tip O'Neil CUT social security benefits, but I never heard a peep about that.

I can only hope these angry "Dems" can see how unfair they're being toward this president. I can only hope they can see that the president, through political ju-jitsu, is calling the Republicans' bluff, because in order for there to be a C-CPI, the Republicans will have to agree to tax hikes. So it's DOA. But in the process, he's showed those loyal S.S. recipient seniors and habitual Republican voters that the Republicans with their LyinRyan budget plan are trying to destroy very "entitlements" they depend on.

[MannyGoldstein]

436. So you claim that FDR felt that each man's SS contributions should go into a lockbox

and if that lockbox is exhausted after years of paying benefits, that man is shut off?

Interesting.

Under the FDR scheme you allege, what happens to any remaining money if he dies before exhausting his lockbox savings?

[BlueCaliDem]

438. I don't know if that was his "scheme". I know that he was against men getting any type of welfare.

He made that adamantly clear to his Labor Secretary, the woman who should be the one to be praised in this thread for the creation of Social Security through the "novel use of the power to tax 78 years ago". So any money paid out after the exact amount a man pays into S.S. is welfare. Yes?

“He didn’t want it to be a welfare program,” said O’Donnell, citing a comment FDR made to Perkins in a private meeting. Roosevelt said, “We put those payroll contributions there so as to give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their pensions and their unemployment benefits. With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my Social Security program.”
That is not to say, however, that Roosevelt didn’t believe in welfare, but the welfare provision was intended to be used exclusively by women. “Franklin Roosevelt hated the idea of men collecting welfare,” O’Donnell said.

If you listen to Ms Perkins speech, you can hear her say it how he went on "about the dole! The dole! Not the dole!"

As to your second question, I don't know. I guess it would be as it is today. My father and mother both died before they could collect a dime in social security, unemployment, or Medicare . . . nothing happens. The money is still there. Or it could be paid out to the widow and remaining children under the welfare provision.

Remember, the original intent of social security was to "give some measure of protection to the average citizen, and to his family, against the loss of a job and against poverty-stricken old-age.”

[MannyGoldstein]

445. Can we both agree that, from the very start of SS, retired men could receive

more than they put in?

[vrp]

318. No clue!

I have no idea who you are or where you come from but I do know you pulled this out of your ass. So what is your motive? Either read a book or go away.

[BlueCaliDem]

435. A Noob is going to tell this DU veteran to "go away"?

What brass ones you've got!

How about you do less bossing around and more research? FDR has always been against men on the dole. COLA and payments beyond what a man pays into S.S. is government welfare as is the case today is being "on the dole" in FDR's eyes, whether you like it or not. And FDR was AGAINST men getting welfare or, on "the dole".

[Mojorabbit]

451. Social Security is not Welfare.

and on edit
I found this
passed.

As Governor, Roosevelt had secured a program of old age pensions, unemployment relief and labor legislation and had taken the initiative to call a Conference of Governors to discuss unemployment and relief.

F.D.R., having visited county poorhouses in his State, expressed his feeling: “Somehow it just tears my heart to see those old men and women there, more than almost anything that I know. We need a drastic revision of the poor laws, and I propose to recommend it.”

When he signed the State Old Age Pension Law, F.D.R. said: “Our American aged do not want charity, but rather old age comforts to which they are rightfully entitled by their own thrift and foresight in the form of insurance.”
from
The Roosevelt Administration and Social Security
By Abe Bortz, Social Security Administration Historian (1963-1985)
Note: This entry is a portion of Special Study #1, a lecture Dr. Bortz, the first SSA Historian,developed as part of SSA’s internal training program. Up until the early 1970s new employees were trained at SSA headquarters in Baltimore before being sent to assume their new duties in offices around the country. As part of this training, Dr. Bortz presented a curriculum on the history of Social Security. This lecture, developed in the early 1970s, was the core of that curriculum. It features an extensive overview of social policy developments dating from pre-history up to the passage of the Social Security Act in 1935.
http://www.socialwelfarehistory.com/eras/social-security-the-roosevelt-administration/

[BlueCaliDem]

453. Any social security benefits paid out above and beyond what people pay in, is welfare.

Isn't that how it works? When a state gets more Federal dollars than they send it, they're called welfare states, right?

"Almost all American workers paid 7.65 percent of their taxable income into the Social Security and Medicare trust funds in 2010, up to $106,800 annually for Social Security. That amount will temporarily drop to 5.65 percent in 2011. Employers pay a matching 7.65 percent for each worker. And self-employed workers must contribute 13.3 percent of their income to the entitlement programs in 2011. Many people wonder if they will get back at least the amount they contributed in retirement.

The answer largely depends on when you retire and how much you've earned over your lifetime. Consider a single man who earns the average wage throughout his career ($43,100 in 2010 dollars), works every year from age 22 to 64, and then retires at age 65 in 2010. Over his lifetime he has paid $345,000 into the system. But he is likely to get back $72,000 more than that, or $417,000 in Social Security and Medicare payouts, according to recent Urban Institute calculations. A single women with the same work and tax history will come out even further ahead due to her longer life expectancy, likely netting $464,000 in lifetime benefits, which is $192,000 more than she paid into the system. These amounts are in constant 2010 dollars and assume a 2 percent real interest rate."
http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2011/01/06/will-you-get-back-your-social-security-taxes-in-retirement

COLA and payouts above and beyond what you pay in is social welfare. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it wasn't FDR's original intent for Social Security {a program that his Labor Secretary, Frances Perkins, not he, had worked to get through}. She knew that it had to be "amended, and amended, and amended", but above all, both had one vision - to keep it solvent and lasting forever. At the rate we're going now, social security according to the SSA Trustee's report, we are facing 25% cuts in benefits - eight years earlier than predicted in 2005. And you want to keep the status quo?

[Mojorabbit]

454. The social security historian I quoted

does not seem to agree with you. The link has a very nice overview of his thinking. Even as governor he made the statement above. He included men in several statements as above at the link contrary to your earlier statement. He made it clear he did not want to see the elderly in the poverty conditions that were occuring at the time. I do not want to keep the status quo. I want the cap to be raised.
We all pay in to social security. Some people will use more than they paid in and others will pass away before they qualify to use any of their benefits.
Peace, Mojo

On edit. Here is his speech from the above link. Note that he calls it insurance and not welfare.
Mojo
“Among our objectives I place the security of the men, women, and children of the nation first.
The security for the individual and for the family concerns itself primarily with three factors. People want decent homes to live in; they want to locate them where they can engage in productive work; and they want some safeguard against misfortunes which cannot be wholly eliminated in this man-made world of ours.

In a simple and primitive civilization homes were to be had for the building. The bounties of nature in a new land provided crude but adequate food and shelter. When land failed, our ancestors moved on to better land. It was always possible to push back the frontier, but the frontier has now disappeared. Our task involves the making of a better living out of the lands that we have.

So also, security was attained in the earlier days through the inter-dependence of members of families upon each other and of the families within a small community upon each other. The complexities of great communities and of organized industry make less real these simple means of security. Therefore, we are compelled to employ the active interest of the Nation as a whole through government in order to encourage a greater security for each individual who composes it.

The third factor relates to security against the hazards and vicissitudes of life. Fear and worry based on unknown danger contribute to social unrest and economic demoralization. If, as our Constitution tells us, our Federal Government was established among other things ‘to promote the general welfare’, it is our plain duty to provide for that security upon which welfare depends.

Next winter we may well undertake the great task of furthering the security of the citizen and his family through social insurance.

This is not an untried experiment. Lessons of experience are available from States, from industries, and from many nations of the civilized world. The various types of social insurance are interrelated; and I think it is difficult to attempt to solve them piecemeal. Hence, I am looking for a sound means which I can recommend to provide at once security against several of the great disturbing factors in life–especially those which relate to unemployment and old age. I believe there should be a maximum of cooperation between States and the Federal Government. I believe that the funds necessary to provide this insurance should be raised by contribution rather than by an increase in general taxation. Above all, I am convinced that social insurance should be national in scope, although the several States should meet at least a large portion of the cost of management, leaving to the Federal Government the responsibility of investing, maintaining, and safeguarding the funds constituting the necessary insurance reserves.

I have commenced to make, with the greatest of care, the necessary actuarial and other studies necessary for the formulation of plans for the consideration of the Seventy-fourth Congress.

These three great objectives– the security of the home, the security of livelihood, and the security of social insurance– are, it seems to me, a minimum of the promise that we can offer to the American people. They constitute a right which belongs to every individual and every family willing to work. They are the essential fulfillment of measures already taken toward relief, recovery, and reconstruction.”

[BlueCaliDem]

455. You should try to keep your posts readable. I generally take a pass on long posts.

I do not want to keep the status quo. I want the cap to be raised.

Raising the cap will never happen, no matter how much you wish for it. It will NOT benefit workers, even top-earners when they can finally apply for their earned benefits. I give you Lawrence O'Donnell who explains it better than I:

What would they {FDR & Frances Perkins} think of the current debate on making cutbacks to the program now? “I have absolutely no doubt tonight that Franklin Roosevelt would support President Obama’s proposed reduction of three-tenths of a percent in the annual increase in Social Security retirement benefits,” O’Donnell surmised. “Roosevelt would think it perfectly reasonable to slightly reduce the annual increase in order to extend the solvency of the program. He would absolutely be opposed to simply removing the limit {cap} of Social Security so that rich people would pour much more money into funding Social Security because then workers including the highest-earning workers would not be getting a payment based on what they paid in and the top-earning workers would actually get back much less than they paid in.”

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/04/11/what-would-frances-perkins-think-of-the-current-social-security-debate/ Start at the timeline: 11:25

But the C-CPI is a moot subject because in order for the Republicans to vote for it {when they would rather run out the clock and see S.S. collapse under its own weight instead}, they'd have to agree to major tax increases and the removal of subsidies to Big Oil and Big Agri, among other revenue provisions in the president's budget proposal, and that alone is enough for them to say no.

Instead, they'd rather sit back and watch the Left bash the president, just as they were happy to do during health care reform debate. It won them the House in 2010, and a sea of red across the country, and these legislatures solidified GOP power ,as we'd seen in last election.

[Mojorabbit]

456. I disagree once again

My post was short. The rest of it was a snip of his speech which shows the opposite of what you said he was thinking at the time. He did mention men, He did say he did not want to see the elderly in poverty, He did want security for the citizens of this country.
I am sure it is easier to watch L O D on tv "surmising" what Roosevelt would have done instead of reading what a social security Historian has to say and reading the words of Roosevelt himself.
He got things done, he fought for what he thougt was needed.
Enjoy the rest of the thread and I hope you have a lovely weekend.
Peace, Mojo

[BlueCaliDem]

457. I never expected you to agree. I knew that going in.

So we'll just have to agree to disagree. We both made our points and we both stand by them.

Have a good weekend, and may we celebrate that at least one of the murders in the Boston Marathon bombing has been apprehended and will face justice. May he never see the light of day so nothing can disturb him as he meditates on what he's done.

Peace out.

[sabrina 1]

42. True, we have to educate them. That's what I have been doing and it's amazing how few people ever

heard that a Dem President was responsible for all the great programs they love so much.

[MannyGoldstein]

46. Perhaps you can educate us on how to educate

Because we should all be educating!

[sabrina 1]

60. It depends on who I am talking to..

Eg, the other day I got a perfect opportunity to educate someone because she brought it up. We were talking about something, and she mentioned SS not being there by the time people retire. I asked her why she thought that? She actually couldn't answer, she just believed it because she heard it so often she didn't think to ask anyone to explain it to her.

So I explained. I told her about FDR and a little bit about the history of how he got it passed, and about Francis Perkins (she had never heard of her). I explained why the lie she believed was a lie. She was amazed. She is one more person who will know what to say to the next person who says it to her.

Sometimes I bring it up again depending on the people I am with. And what the conversation is about.. Most people, I discovered, know very little about it. That is the fault of the Dems though, they should be educating people about it.

[MannyGoldstein]

130. It almost seems like we should each have a deck of cards

each with a bit of history about how Liberals are responsible for something that Americans hold dear.

We could hand out the cards as the opportunity arises, and discuss.

[sabrina 1]

145. That's a great idea!

We could sell them as novelties. Maybe Costco would put them in their stores. Buy them as gifts, stocking stuffers at Christmas.

Or make a trivia game 'What do you know about SS'?

And then use the money to support real Democratic candidates.

Manny you're genius.

[MannyGoldstein]

414. Aw shucks.

Hmmm...

[sabrina 1]

446. Lol ...

Well, it IS!

[JDPriestly]

175. Excellent!

Why don't we talk to Robert Reich about that idea. I love his chalk-board talks.

He makes things simple and clear.

[Mnpaul]

215. You can put FDR's four freedoms on one of them

The first is freedom of speech and expression -- everywhere in the world.

The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way -- everywhere in the world.

The third is freedom from want -- which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants -- everywhere in the world.

The fourth is freedom from fear -- which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor-- anywhere in the world.

[tblue]

214. Until we have another FDR

we will keep going down this bad road. Unless and until, I should say.

[neverforget]

10. Present!

[Octafish]

11. Here!

It's what Paul Wellstone called "The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party."

[gordianot]

12. By way of my Grandfather a convert and friend of Clarence Cannon and Harry Truman.

[raging moderate]

13. The Roosevelts saved my parents from starving to death during the Depression.

I love Franklin Roosevelt, and Eleanor Roosevelt, too!

[MannyGoldstein]

33. Eleanor was amazing, too.

Without Eleanor, the world would have been a much poorer place. FDR was a consummate politician, but I think that Eleanor (and Francis Perkins) gave him much of his soul and love of doing good.

[L0oniX]

34. +1 ^^^^^^^^^

[ColesCountyDem]

351. FDR's actions made lifelong, 'yellow dog Democrats' out of my 3 Republican grandparents.

Prior to 1932, only my paternal grandfather was a Democrat.

[joesdaughter]

14. April12

My mother always remembered the day of his death by lighting a candle at church. If she was busy, she had one of us kids make the offering. She said it was a thank you from America.

[silverweb]

16. Check.

[bbgrunt]

17. here,hear!

[still_one]

18. Here

[L0oniX]

19. Yes I am part of the minority FDR "REAL" Dem party.

I refuse to fawn over pictures of dear leader like he's some 3rd world dictator. Sadam had his pictures splashed all over Iraq. Hitler, Stalin and others had their pictures all over. WTF is with people? It's a damn flawed imperfect human ...not a g0d!

[DearHeart]

23. Completely agree!

[BlueCaliDem]

245. Hahaha! Who's picture is that in your avatar? hah! eom

[DearHeart]

359. I don't IDOLIZE FDR...I don't IDOLIZE anyone!

I don't agree with everything that FDR did, same with Clinton, and Obama, but I have agreed more with FDR than with Obama. Also, I have changed my avi about 5 times this year, depends on my mood and this change coincided with the Chained-CPI shit!

[Number23]

376. !!

Oh, the irony!! Too funny

[BlueCaliDem]

433. Isn't it?

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. +1,000

[Mnpaul]

49. I can't believe they tried to hide this comment

Well they lost 5-1. I guess this means you are not as bad a as freeper

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

Theodore Roosevelt

[MannyGoldstein]

62. Three years ago, that comment would have earned a tombstone.

Things have changed!

Aw hell... This comment will probably earn *me* a tombstone. Adios, amigos!

[Mnpaul]

68. Not even as close to offensive

as the comment made by the person alerting

[tblue]

213. Oh do tell.

You got me all curious now.

[Mnpaul]

218. I did in #210

n/t

[Mnpaul]

448. I look at all the comments

still worried?

[ieoeja]

163. The "dear leader" is just a plain out and out insult. I'm as pissed at Obama as everyone else, but

I would have voted to hide because of that.

[pscot]

186. I thought it was more about the "cult of personality"

that some democrats seem to have joined. We supposedly have a government of laws, not of men.

[L0oniX]

193. "cult of personality" is exactly what my post is about and it's why I call them...

worshippers. American Idol is not just on tv ...it's here on DU too.

[Mnpaul]

204. I know and they come up with the dumbest arguments

to defend this shit. Over and over again

Neon lights, a Nobel prize
Than the mirror speaks, the reflection lies
You won't have to follow me
Only you can set me free

I sell the things you need to be
I'm the smiling face on your tv
I'm the cult of personality
I exploit you, still you love me
I tell you one and one makes three
I'm the cult of personality
Like Joseph Stalin and Gandhi
I'm the cult of personality
The cult of personality
The cult of personality

[AnotherMcIntosh]

212. Same here. That was my take on the use of the phrase.

[L0oniX]

194. Your vote would be another indication that the jury system is out of control.

Insulting DU members is alert worthy. There's no DU rules against insults towards government officials.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

356. Really?

Please explain. I'm a little dense right now.

[L0oniX]

189. There is a conserted effort by the worshippers to alert on my posts.

I guess I am hitting a nerve ....and that tells me I am doing something right.

[Mnpaul]

210. Yep, someone has an agenda

It's not just that they may like Obama and enjoy lighthearted images. No, according to LOonix, they're a declaration away from being the Kommandant at Auschwitz. LOonix won't cease his over-the-top attacks on other board members until juries start curbing his abusive behavior.

They can't respond with any defense so they alert.

[L0oniX]

223. "a declaration away from being the Kommandant at Auschwitz" LMFAO OMG

That's some real warped shit there ...I must be really burning their worshipping ass. I guess the blind can't see what it looks like to the unblind to post pictures and then comment on how wonderful and great a person is. There are a lot of people who are dedicated to watching tv shows centred on idolatry and it has IMO bled over into DU.

Kommandant? hmmm freeper spelling?

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

358. It's just that damned bug you have running around.

You have no idea the times I've tried to swipe my screen clean! Lol!

[sabrina 1]

21. Here

We so badly need someone who knows how to put the people before the banks right now in this country.

[SirRevolutionary]

22. Reporting for duty

but I think we're probably dying off

[sabrina 1]

45. We're in the majority in this country. Most people love FDR's social programs although many don't

have a clue who they should thank for them. But ask anyone, including Republicans if they think SS should be abolished, without informing them whose legislation it was, and 9 out of 10 will tell you 'no way'.

[SirRevolutionary]

63. I tend to agree with you

Most people probably love everything FDR did for us, and continue to this day to enjoy the full benefit of many of his programs, but they're clueless and/or non-political and just have no idea. So many of them listen to Fox or CNN and just go with whatever the tv machine tells them even though it's contrary to their inner beliefs at times. At least it's a hopeful thing to think.

[sabrina 1]

85. Here's a perfect example of right wingers not knowing that Medicare is a 'commie, socialist program'

Lots of photos of tea baggers too with signs saying 'keep your government hands off my SS'

They had no clue who gave them these programs, but they loved them. When party politics is left out, people are more free to think for themselves and state what they believe.

[savannah43]

187. Don't you just love people who think that communism and socialism

are the same thing? I think that actual thinking physically hurts many people. And reading and studying? Those must cause migraines.

[SirRevolutionary]

297. It's astonishing, the stupidity

I volunteer with a bunch of ultra righty teabagger wackos and the stuff that comes out of their mouths. They recognize corporate greed and the CEOs of hospitals making hordes of money (in fact, they initiate conversations on the topic), but if I suggest perhaps "regulation" or universal healthcare, they cringe. I have no idea what they think society is to do in order to curve corporate greed if not establish government intervention of some sort, or level the playing field somehow at least. Do they think the corporate slobs will just stop crushing us once they're all rich enough?

[Dragonfli]

112. That's true, they require constant PR and disinformation

campaigns to try to convince most Americans that most Americans are against his social programs and they are wrong and in the minority for disagreeing

[sabrina 1]

146. Manny had a great idea somewhere else in this thread. Make a deck of cards with information and a

little history of all the great liberal programs democrats are responsible for. Or a trivia game would be fun 'what do you know about SS'? With true or false questions such as 'SS won't be there when you retire, true or false' etc.

[motocicleta2]

157. I like it.

Some friends and I are working on an app for this purpose. Not so much history as just being able to effectively, calmly, rationally discuss issues and misinformation when the moments arise. Hopefully it will make some little difference here and there.

[sabrina 1]

182. That sounds like a great idea. Let us know when it is ready.

Imo, we need to be relentless in combatting the negative propaganda against SS. Democrats should be constantly praising it, but for some reason they seem more ashamed of it than proud, as they should be.

[motocicleta2]

251. No joke. Very strange.

I will post a little something when it's ready. Soft launch on Flag Day and then go live on the 4th of July. Is the plan, anyway.

[Arctic Dave]

24. Here.

[mick063]

25. The right constantly attempts to vilify a very popular President

The truth is that the American people loved him and kept him in power for the duration of his life. As close to a monarchy as the US ever had.

Upon closer inspection of how FDR took on the Robber Barons, one can easily conclude that our current President either has no balls or is philosophically inclined to diminish the New Deal.

As time passes, our President's legacy will become forgettable as FDR's legacy grows more profound.

As the Robber Barons become increasingly oppressive, it is FDR's vision that will inspire the populace and Barak Obama will be remembered like Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, or James Buchanan. Just another forgettable man that happened to serve as President. A place holder for the wealthy.

[Dragonfli]

113. I like your post

[AnotherMcIntosh]

188. Allthough Franklin Roosevelt was President when Matthew Josephson wrote his book The Robber Barons,

wasn't Josephson referring to the "The Great Capitalists, 1861 - 1901"? And wasn't it Theodore Roosevelt who ended the reign of the Robber Barons when he took office?

[mick063]

219. and there is a difference?

I suppose you wish to give authors their due and neatly catergorize the labels we apply.
There is no monopoly on the descriptors for evil, greedy men.

This isn't a proper history lesson.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

234. Yes, there is a difference.

You will have more credibility if you say things which are commonly accepted as being true.

When you stretch things which are commonly accepted as true and stretch a metaphor beyond its commonly accepted meaning, you have less credibility or unnecessarily risk having less credibility.

Josephson's The Robber Barons has been a text book commonly used in liberal arts courses in colleges and universities.



It's a common source for the understanding of the phrase "robber barons." No one can identity an alternative common source for an understanding of that phrase.

Who knows what you mean by "robber barons"? Does that mean anyone of wealth during FDR's Administration with whom you disapprove? For anyone other than you, are we supposed to use our imaginations to try to figure out what you meant? Did FDR really disapprove of all persons of wealth during his Administration? Did he really take them all on? Who other than you knows what you meant.

And no, you don't have to "suppose you wish to give authors their due and neatly catergorize the labels we apply." One of the worst things about some posters is that they falsely attrribute certain statements or beliefs to others. In my world, the truth is good enough. My words speak for themselves.

Although I posted my response to you without malice, and although I think that you lose credibility when you make a statement which is not literally true by stretching a metaphor beyone its commonly understood meaning, the choice to do so is yours.

[mick063]

247. So I will make it clear.

Not metaphorically. Not symbolically. Not a historical reference.
Reading a specfic book or being college educated is not a prerequisite
Boasting of having unique intellectual insight isn't on the agenda.

I mean it as a literal descriptor of modern .01% wealthiest people.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

250. So I'll make it clear too. If you oppose responses to your posts and respond with hostility to

responses which were not intended as being hostile, fuck off.

[Progressive dog]

343. Mick063 was right, not you

You might want to check Wikipedia before you get hostile about responses that contradict your encyclopedic knowledge.

[mick063]

391. I apologize you were offended.

Please forgive me.

I simply don't feel that depicting the Robber Barons to your standards is required. I will not attempt to justify using the term. They are what they are. I will continue to call them so.

You did provide a good service. Perhaps an individual will be inspired to read the book. I appreciate your determined viewpoint. There are bigger problems in the world than arguing over this.

[octoberlib]

26. Here!

[truedelphi]

27. Glad to see some people showing up.

PARTIE ANYONE!?!

I have a bit of a full speed happy song going on!

[Bryn]

28. Here

[LeftInTX]

29. Here

[MrSlayer]

32. That's how I describe myself.

This is what the Democratic standard should be. FDR style pro-labor Democrats are NOT fringe left wingers. I'm sick of the scumbag third way, corporate Reaganites claiming we are.

[pa28]

35. Absolutely. We knew a battle over Social Security was coming and that might be a good thing.

Sometimes a good old fashioned family fight is just what you need.

[L0oniX]

40. FDR Dems, families and people love their grand parents.

[Demo_Chris]

36. FDR Democrat and proud liberal.

[Zorra]

37. Here. nt

[alittlelark]

38. Without question.

[progressoid]

39. Tired, but here.

[haikugal]

41. Here Manny!

[abelenkpe]

43. Hello

[DeSwiss]

44. K&R

[Mojorabbit]

47. I am here. I wonder if it is an age thing.

Younger posters came of age when Reagan was in office and have not experienced what we have. His presidency for me is when the money people took over.

[MannyGoldstein]

51. Probably related to age

But everyone can appreciate FDR if they know what he did. Even my 13-year-old son, who loves to hate everything I love, is an FDR Democrat.

[pa28]

58. Your post reminded me of Hamilton Jordan's White House memoire.

Not exactly a literary classic but it did contain one memorable item. He described the Reagan transition team descending on the white house the day after the election.

He said it was like "an army of bankers" dressed in expensive suits. They had no time for pleasantries at all, there was an agenda and they were acting like they were already behind.

Presidents have come and gone but the army of bankers have remained apparently.

[Mnpaul]

61. I think you are right

they have no idea how much we have already lost.

[Jamastiene]

136. I grew up during the Reagan years.

While Jimmy Carter was still president, we had food on the table and my family could make ends meet. After Reagan got in, we had less food, could only afford lower quality food, and could not make ends meet. I have despised Reagan since my childhood.

So, there are some younger ones of us out here who might not have lived during the time FDR was president, but wish there was possibly a way to find and nominate a modern day FDR to vote for.

[ieoeja]

172. The road in front of my parents house went from paved to rock to dirt during the Reagan admin.

Every friend and the majority of my relatives makes less money today than they did in 1980. And that is in real dollars, not adjusted for inflation!

As an IT guy I did quite well, of course. But I was never blind to what was going on around me.

I wasn't in the city then, so I can only go by what everyone else tells me about the homeless in the parks and on the street. They tell me there were none, or at least none that they noticed, back in the 1970s. I can only imagine walking to work without passing people sleeping off to the side.

My first job up here was with the Veteran's Administration in Feb 1985. They told me Reagan ordered the VA mental health facilities closed immediately after the re-election. They tried finding relatives or other mental health facilities that would take in the patients. But when the final day came a large number of patients had to be wheeled out to the sidewalk, taken out of the wheelchairs and simply abandoned. For weeks afterward many of them wandered the parking lots asking anyone they met what they were supposed to do, why they were outside, etc.

The anger at the VA that February was still in full force.

Reagan did not believe in mental illness. Too bad his friends and family didn't feel the same way about Ronnie's illness.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

363. What we "had".

With you a hundred percent. My kids just don't understand. But really, unless you experienced it, how can you?

[blackspade]

48. Here!

[Douglas Carpenter]

50. I guess that comes about as close as I could describe myself within the context of American politics

[Spitfire of ATJ]

52. Most of America wants another FDR....

The last one was elected for life.

[MannyGoldstein]

53. Guess how old he was when he died?

A lot younger than most people think.

He gave us his all.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

93. He gave MOST of his policies in his first 100 days in office....

We don't hear about the importance of "The first 100 days" the way we used to. Traditionally an entire presidency was laid out in that period.

It did for Bush,....he went on vacation.

[LeftInTX]

96. Without looking at wikipedia: About 65?

He had heart problems and he smoked. I know he exercised a lot, but still not being able to walk puts a strain on one's heart.

[Lugnut]

54. Here!

I'm a member of the Democratic wing of the Democratic party.

[Mnpaul]

55. American Badass

I watched this ridiculous movie the other night on Netflix. There were some funny parts but it was mostly stupid. He got polio from a nazi werewolf bite. Rocket launchers on the armrest and machine guns in the wheel hubs.

[Dragonfli]

110. Sounds similar to "Abraham Lincoln vs Zombies"

He had this really cool sickle, sort of a switch blade sickle collapsible and everything.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2246549/

[Indyfan53]

387. Is that Brad from the Rocky Horror Picture Show?!

[Mnpaul]

396. Yes it is

Barry Bostwick plays FDR

[GiveMeFreedom]

56. I think I am, I love Senator Warren. n/t

[longship]

57. Reporting for service, sir.

Learned about FDR at my mother's knee. My father was an Eisenhower Republican (who despised the Bush family and Reagan).

But my politics have all about FDR since my teen years in the early sixties.

Thanks, Manny.

[oldhippydude]

59. me too

[Rowdyboy]

64. I'm a bit more of an "Eleanor Roosevelt" Democrat but it boils down to much the same....

Also thought Adlai Stevenson was a giant and Hubert Humphrey (circa 1948) a real hero. Those were the days of Democrats I'm proud of.

[salib]

463. So, where do we rally at?

Website? Organizations?

[woo me with science]

65. Present! nt

[quakerboy]

66. Pretty sure that I am

I had a few issues, but overall I really liked the Democratic party platform statements during his tenure.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

67. +1000 nt

[eridani]

69. Moi?

Is a bear Catholic? Does the Pope shit in the woods? Hell fucking yes!!

[zeeland]

70. I am and so are my kids.

I've never wasted an opportunity to explain
how the country once operated vs. the
lowered expectations todays American fails
to question.

They get it.

[RufusTFirefly]

71. Even more of an ER Democrat, but I'm an FDR booster as well!

[Samantha]

72. Yes, I am a Real New Deal Democrat

and I am still here.

Sam

[wilsonbooks]

73. Kicked

[just1voice]

74. Checking in, in all my uselessness in this land-o-propaganda

One of FDR's enemies, Joseph Goebbels, would have loved the 6 big corporations that control 90% of our American media now. Goebbels would be making 7+ figures a year as a VP somewhere, likely at NewsCorp.

I wonder what FDR would have thought about letting torture camps go on and on in America's name?

[olddots]

75. checking in

FDR lives

[TekGryphon]

76. On my transition from being Republican to Independent to Democrat...

... I ended up in FDR territory, thanks largely to fantastic economists like Tomas and Kurgman who helped me realize how self destructive supply side economics was, but it was a long road there and I had a few stops in between.

One of the other Presidents I felt (and still do feel) strongly attuned to is Eisenhower. Republican he may have been, but he was still a hero in my eyes, right up there with FDR. He warned us against the MIC, believed strongly in government investiture in society (he built the interstate highway system) and defended a tax structure that motivated growth while protecting the lower and middle class from wage predations.

[MannyGoldstein]

78. Eisenhower was astonishing

Led the Allies to victory in Europe, then a great president.

In many ways, I think he was the quintessential American.

[graham4anything]

220. Are you serious??? ARE YOU SERIOUS??? Adlai Stevenson was astonishing.

Eisenhower started Vietnam, and Eisenhower was Reagan1.

If you are serious, well...I never.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

296. Uh, no, Eisenhower DID NOT start Vietnam. The French started Vietnam.

Truman sent military advisors.

Eisenhower sent military advisors.

JFK sent military advisors.

After LBJ defeated Goldwater, in part, by saying such things as "We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves," he sent combat troops.
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/l/lyndonbjo400830.html

After Nixon defeated Humphrey, in part, by saying that he had a plan to end the Vietnam war, he escalated it.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

199. Wasn't Eisenhower the alternative to the military dictator in Japan who ran for the presidency

in 1948 and was still a viable candidate until Eisenhower stepped in?

Eisenhower served as MacArthur's assistant in Washington and his advisor in the Philippines in the 1930s. He disliked MacArthur for his vanity, his penchant for theatrics, and for what Eisenhower perceived as "irrational" behavior. "Probably no one has had tougher fights with a senior than I had with MacArthur," Eisenhower once said. While Eisenhower served as Chief of Staff after World War II, MacArthur undermined his efforts to slow down mobilization and later to unify the armed services. He willingly admitted though that MacArthur was smart, decisive, and a brilliant military mind. Working under him was frustrating, but also an invaluable learning experience.

"I just can't understand how such a damn fool could have gotten to be a general."

http://www.nps.gov/features/eise/jrranger/5accomp4X.htm

To those who stopped MacArthur from becoming the President in 1952, including Eisenhower: Thank you.

[KauaiK]

77. FDR Favorite Quote: The test of our progress is

not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.

[MannyGoldstein]

79. But he'd be in favor of chained CPI, no? Nt

[KauaiK]

83. Nope; I don't think so.

Franklin was the ultimate politician but a bit feckless; Eleanor was brains with empathy and GUTS!

[hedda_foil]

80. FDR FDREVER!

The best American President to date. Probably the best there will ever be. But oh what hopes we had that Obama would resurrect his legacy.

[No Vested Interest]

81. FDR was the President when I was born

He was our President throughout WWII,
and I remember the shock when he died so suddenly.

[ChaoticTrilby]

82. His beliefs mostly seemed to match up with mine.

Thus, here I am, reporting for duty!

[Oilwellian]

84. Born and raised!

[Egalitarian Thug]

86. Here. Though much less often than in the recent past.

I find it harder and harder to suffer the fools after my own year of hell.

[jsr]

87. Recommend

Too bad there are no plans to put FDR on Mt. Rushmore, instead of Reagan or any Reagan wannabe.

[a2liberal]

88. Checking in!

Thanks for reminding me I still need to set my sig back up

[ReRe]

89. Present

An FDR Democrat, i.e. the Democratic wingness of DemocraticUnderground.

I wouldn't worry about this not getting many replies, (if it doesn't,)
as most Democrats are asleep.

[hay rick]

90. Here.

[DLnyc]

91. Yes

[The Second Stone]

92. YO!

I'm here!

[me b zola]

95. checking in!

[PufPuf23]

97. Present nt

[Dragonfli]

98. Still here, barely even been checking in but, here

Last edited Wed Apr 17, 2013, 04:09 AM - Edit history (1)

I've had a lot of pressing local issues the last couple of days

[colorado_ufo]

99. Reporting for duty!

[AzDar]

100. Present.

[Diclotican]

101. MannyGoldstein

MannyGoldstein

I'm not sure what a FDR democrat means - but he was definitely one of the best US presidents the last 100 year - and I do hope his legacy will endure for a long time yet...

Our current King Harald V of Norway learned to bike-ride in the hallways of the White House in fact - as he and his family was visitors, and friends of the Roosevelt's in the 1940s.. And he is the only US president who have a statue in Oslo.

Diclotican

[MannyGoldstein]

124. That's really cool

My family has spent some time on Campobello Island, where FDR's summer home stands. It's surprisingly small for the number of people it housed - seems that FDR liked to be in a place filled with people and action and noise.

I can picture a White House where children learned to ride bicycles in the hallways while Cabinet secretaries meet and the fate of the planet is decided. Very alive.

[Diclotican]

190. MannyGoldstein

MannyGoldstein

Some people is like that - they manage to make a home a place for everyone to meet - young, grown up, and old ones - and it often makes for a nice, if noisy house

And in fact, our current King, and the rest of the royal family was given refugee by the President of the United States no less - when the germans occupied Norway, The King (Haakon) and crown prince (Olav, the later King Olav V) had to flee north of the capital - but the rest of the family was trying their best to leave for Sweden, as the crown-princess was a swede before married our then crown prince. She and the family was hold up at the border, as the swedish government was less than happy about the prospect of having a "Hot potato" as Sweden had some close ties to the germans - and it is rumored that some member of the swedish royal family had more than just friendly connections to the german Nazi party.. Anyway - the royal family was hold up at the border - and it was just luck the swedish border guard finally, after some political bitching in Stockholm decided to let them in in the country - just ahead of the german forces, who was trying their best to get the rest of the royal family - and maybe use them against the again King and crown-prince.. The royal family had to leave Stockholm after a while, and had to take a train true sweden - to the north part of Sweden, where a american troop ship, and was sailing the long way to the United States - on board a Navy ship - no less on the invitation of the President of the United States. Who welcomed them when they arrived in New York - and for a while even sheltered them in the White House as guest of the President with all the services who come with it.. After a while, the family ended up in Pork Hill Maryland, where was seen as a safe place for a young prince to live. And he was in the US for more than 5 year - and a important part of his childhood was in fact being in the United States... And he have hold US in a high regard ever since.. Even Bush was not able to destroy that

At one time, he told that the 5 years he was in the US, was also years he was free to be a ordinary kid - just another kid who happend to be a refugee in the US.. And just had a bodyguard with him at all times, just in case something could happend..

Diclotican

[kurtzapril4]

372. Thank you for this, Diclotican!

That is a very interesting story, and one I hadn't heard before!

[Diclotican]

375. kurtzapril4

kurtzapril4

The reality is often more interesting than fiction - and It is maybe not surprising this part of history are not known to many - as Norway IS a small country - and who in the large scale of things maybe is not the most important country in the world - even though we sometimes believe it ourself ..

Diclotican

[MannyGoldstein]

444. There was so much history happening then!

And some people played their role well. Others not as well.

[LittleBlue]

102. Hello!

Right here!

[LeftInTX]

103. I saw the American Experience bio of him

Eleanor feels he got his compassion for average and disadvantaged Americans from his struggles with polio.

He founded the March of Dimes.
He became a firm believer in physical therapy.
The kids at Warm Springs called him Rosy
He used to love water sports at Warm Springs.

[Blue Palasky]

104. hola

why am I awake right now?

[Wabbajack_]

105. He died before my parents were born

But I like him, few can hold a candle since, I find much to be unhappy about our more recent Democratic Presidents. One of the giants of American history who changed the country for the better.

[KansDem]

106. You can include me!

[BuelahWitch]

107. Me

Lucky enough to grow up with a mother and maternal grandmother who revered him.

[defacto7]

108. Got room for one more???

I'll bring beer.

[Le Taz Hot]

109. If I was still a Democrat,

I would be of the FDR variety. Maybe a little more to the left.

[tokenlib]

111. Better late to the thread than never...count me IN! n/t

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

114. been here a while now

Cheers!

[Pholus]

115. Still kicking... nt

[dmosh42]

116. Here!

[dreamnightwind]

117. I was sleeping

What the hell do you want? And what have you done with Third Way Manny? I don't think he's gonna like this...

[MannyGoldstein]

120. Don't ask.

TWM is safely medicated now, we found him down at the Senior Center screaming about "earned beneft queens" and "precious bodily fluids". It was pretty ugly.

[sendero]

118. economic justice....

.... my reason for being a Democrat. It's suffering a bit lately.

[Scuba]

119. Here.

[deutsey]

121. For what it's worth, I am

But I don't know what meaning that has anymore since government is now considered the problem instead of the economic royalists whose hatred FDR welcomed.

[LWolf]

122. .

[loudsue]

123. Here.

For all the good it does.

[joshcryer]

125. FDR killed labor. I'm a Huey Long Democrat.

[MannyGoldstein]

127. Perhaps you can share with us the statistics for union membership...

Starting from FDR's first inauguration.

Let's see how badly he killed labor. If I recall correctly, the anti-carnage was horrific.

[joshcryer]

128. He paved the way to neuter it later.

Statistics don't tell the whole story. You can't go "oh well labor flourished under him, he's not responsible for anything past that."

Labor would be doing very well right if he repealed the Norris-LaGuardia Act and avoided creating the NLRB which directly enabled Taft-Hartly.

What many don't understand is that the unions were autonomous, they acted outside of the government. By enshrining labor within the confines of the government (NLRB), it allowed legislation to neuter labor (Taft-Hartly). The laws against labor were made under the auspices of maintaining civil order (to limit striking and nurture it), but there had already existed laws that maintained civil order (don't assault people, etc).

FDR may not have seen it coming (and therefore I don't suggest he intended to kill labor), but Huey Long most certainly did see it coming, and had he been elected the 1%ers never would've existed.

[MannyGoldstein]

129. Oh, come on. Share the statistics.

Let's see how anemic things were.

[joshcryer]

134. You don't credit the legislation for the decline?

What do you credit then?

[MannyGoldstein]

141. The decline didn't start in earnest for 35 years

And skyrocketed during FDR's presidency.

More later... gotta work...

[bvar22]

230. A lot of "IFs" in your speculation,

...and not many hard facts.
We will never know what would have happened IF FDR hadn't created the NLRB.

Did you know that IF Hitler had waited 2 years before starting WW2,
he would have developed the Me262 jet in quantities great enough to stop the 8th Air Force bombing campaign of Germany,
and IF that had happened, he would have won the war?

Fanciful speculation is fun and entertaining, but not really a valid or useful tool in Politics.

However, I am glad you brought up that bastard from Louisiana, Huey Long.
I frequently use him as an example to refute the common myth perpetrated by Conservative Democrats that we MUST run Conservatives in Red States,
to which I respond, "BULLSHIT".

A Charismatic Populist Democrat like Huey Long,
running on a platform of "Economic Justice for Every American",
and "You've been getting SCREWED by the RICH for 30 years, I'll STOP that"
can WIN in ANY state.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[AnotherMcIntosh]

239. Why was Huey Long a bastard? If you have some thoughts, I'll have to do some reading.

Maybe he was different from the roles played by Broderick Crawford and Sean Penn.

[bvar22]

259. I use the term with affection and respect,

though his political opponents didn't.

I was born and raised in Louisiana,
and Huey Long was the best thing that ever happened to La.
Huey Long also had ways of making offers that couldn't be refused.

LBJ was a bastard too, gawd Bless Him, and the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, and the Great Society!



I want Junk Yard Dog BASTARDS representing ME and MY issues in our government.
Nice guys, willing to compromise before the fight, seeking approval from the opposition
never seem to be able to Move-the-Ball in the right direction.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

280. Got it. Thanks.

[joshcryer]

331. The NLRA/NLRB removed courts from the equation destroying labor's agency.

They couldn't any longer go to a court room and make their argument for why they deserved an equal product of their labor. The NLRB said "Hey, we'll do all the discussing here, and shut up, contracts are everything."

Michael Goldfield directly blames the NLRB for becoming more and more conservative over time and erring on the side of the employer in these disputes. No courts, no discussion, just a board that is the decider.

I think you are ignorant of the history of labor before the government started messing with it.

And you don't have to bring up Huey Long to prove Dems can win southern / red states. Jimmy Carter won them handily.

[Jim Lane]

285. You skip right past the Wagner Act.

First, the main impact of the Norris-LaGuardia Act was to prevent federal courts from issuing injunctions against strikes, which courts acting at the behest of employers had frequently done. Why should Roosevelt be faulted for not trying to repeal this law (which was in place before he took office)?

Then in 1935 came the Wagner Act (the National Labor Relations Act). It protected workers' right to organize. You're right that unions previously existed outside the government's purview -- which meant that management was free to fire someone for trying to organize a union. FDR is indeed responsible for the creation of the NLRB, without which employers would still be able to get away with firing organizers, establishing phony company unions, refusing to bargain with real unions, etc.

Your argument is to blame Roosevelt for the Taft-Hartley Act, which was enacted a few years after he died. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

[joshcryer]

329. Norris-LaGuardia is where it started, imo.

I think it allowed the government to set the stage as to labor disputes. Yes, Yellow Dog contracts were shit, but it was one way labor was fighting back hard. If a union man saw a sign saying "Now hiring, no unions!" he'd go in there and freaking sign up and cause all sorts of headaches for the employer. With the government basically saying "we won't discuss it" (by refusing injunctions) it killed the philosophical discussions. It killed the court rulings. It made labor passive with respect to employers (indeed labor cheered it, naively, imo).

Basically the Republicans of that time saw the world through a lens of the almighty contract. And Yellow Dog contracts were a contract that capitalists used to their favor (like the vast majority of non-immediate-transaction-immediate-transfer-based contracts). The Republicans hated the headache it was causing though because it showed a kind of contract that on its face broke the non-aggression principle and it had to be neutered.

What did Norris-Laguardia it get us? Well, where's the Wal-Mart union? It didn't serve its purpose in the long run because Wal-Mart can and will fire anyone who wants to start a union, and it's not in the contract at all! And, because the government won't form injunctions (this is in the event of a mass firing and employees suing Wal-Mart to allow them to keep their jobs), it's not discussed! It's a double edged sword.

What FDR should've realized is that labor disputes should be covered by the government, and not in some sort of set way, but rather, the government should've said "We will look at every labor dispute in a case by case basis." So, when factory workers took over a large baron's shipping company, and they did so wholesale, the discussion about whose property the factory really is would take place.\

Note: Norris-Laguardia did, importantly, say that forming unions did not equate "conspiracy," but I think that part is just common sense really (since unions are merely ones expression of free speech and association). Still, that would've been part of it I think was good.

By NLRB I meant the Wagner Act, my apologies. FDR signed it into law. This created a hierarchy within unions, limiting the power of autonomous union actions. Anyone could form a union, but they needed to select a leader, which went against the original concept of free association and autonomy. This is the "set way" I was talking about. Because all labor disputes are the same, they never actually result in much direct action or strikes or appropriation of capitalist property. It's clean. Board room dealing. And the working class is ignorant of the whole thing because they don't generally experience what labor disputes were like back in the day. Taft-Hartley was an amendment to the Wagner Act and it and other legislation ultimately legitimized stealth yellow dog contracts.

Where something like this is perfectly legal:

[Jim Lane]

336. You're ignoring the ACTUAL use of injunctions.

Before Norris-LaGuardia, the federal courts weren't issuing injunctions to prevent the Walmarts of that era from firing union organizers and members. Firing union organizers and members was perfectly legal until FDR signed the Wagner Act. The injunctions that were actually being issued were against labor unions, ordering strikers to go back to work and thus taking away labor's principal bargaining tool against management.

That Walmart, today, gets away with so much anti-union activity is because the Wagner Act isn't being enforced fully. If that law were repealed, as you seem to desire, many more corporations would be empowered to adopt aggressively anti-union practices.

What if the repeal of the Wagner Act also included the repeal of the Taft-Hartley Act? First, let's just note, in the context of a thread about FDR, that Taft-Hartley (also called the Labor-Management Relations Act, or LMRA) was enacted in 1948 and was not FDR's fault. As for the substance, repeal of Taft-Hartley would leave unions completely free to bargain for closed shop or union shop contracts. Yay! Except that, if the Wagner Act were repealed, the unions would be so defanged that they'd almost never have the bargaining power to win such a contract.

ETA: As to your sample target video, you complain that it's perfectly legal. The Wagner Act limits the kind of anti-union propaganda that employers may use. If the Wagner Act were repealed (with or without the repeal of Taft-Hartley), it would be legal for employers to do much worse than this.

[joshcryer]

337. Wagner Act = No Courts = No Discussion = No Agency

Injunctions = Courts = Trials = Discussion = Agency

I hope this clarifies my argument since I was so utterly wordy last time and I couldn't say it clearly and unambiguously.

edit: I should also agree with you that the Wagner Act isn't exactly enforced the best it could be but that's systematic and has been that way for a very long time and you're not going to fix it legislatively without allowing labor to make their case in the courts and without allowing labor to have wildcat strikes and get rid of the hierarchical nature of the system.

[Jim Lane]

340. As a litigator, I don't share your enthusiasm for having every dispute resolved in court.

I'd love to elaborate, but I have to run off and get some work done on behalf of a client who was injured in an auto accident in 2003 and whose case still isn't completely resolved. (She received most of her compensation in 2010, after a wait of only seven years, but the amount still at issue is significant.)

I can't imagine a system in which every labor dispute goes to court so that a judge can decide what a fair contract would be. Also remember that the judge's decision would be subject to appeal and remember who (as of 2013) is sitting at the top of the appeals chain.

[joshcryer]

342. Fair enough.

Good luck.

Perhaps I have an overly ideal view of the courts in how they can push progressive change through.

[KoKo]

126. Yes...here...

[Jamastiene]

131. I wasn't alive while he was president, but

if there was a time machine, I'd love to go back in time just to vote for him.

[Flashmann]

132. Yo!

[99Forever]

133. That's me. n/t

[Doctor_J]

135. Present

Don't know how much longer though

[Tom Rinaldo]

137. I'm ready

[center][url=http://www.zazzle.com/fdrs_ghost_2016_bumpersticker-128668077313421335?rf=238123555098768331][img][/img][/url]
[url=http://www.zazzle.com/fdrs_ghost_2016_bumpersticker-128668077313421335?rf=238123555098768331]FDR's Ghost 2016 Bumpersticker[/url] by [url=http://www.zazzle.com/wordonthestreet*]WordOnTheStreet[/url]
[url=http://www.zazzle.com/custom/stickers?rf=238123555098768331]Make your own bumpersticker[/url] at zazzle.com.[/center]

[CrispyQ]

138. Proud liberal here!

I have my Mom's ration stamps from WWII. She was just a little girl & my grandmother had to sign for her, but everyone got a ration book. In today's America, there will be no ration stamps, but rather, if you can afford $10 a gallon milk, you will be able to purchase as much as you can & if you cannot afford it, tough fucking shit for you, loser.

A 'kinder, gentler' nation, my ass.

[OnionPatch]

139. Here

[Autumn]

140. Yo! Right here Manny

[Doremus]

142. Present

[Hun Joro]

143. Hello!

[MsLeopard]

144. What I would give for an FDR Democrat now!!

Proud FDR Democrat here.

[Fuddnik]

147. Yo!

[Uncle Joe]

148. You rang?

Thanks for the thread, Manny.

[Mnpaul]

149. One of his best speeches

Message to Congress on the Concentration of Economic Power

The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism -- ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.

The second truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe, if its business system does not provide employment and produce and distribute goods in such a way as to sustain an acceptable standard of living.

Sound familiar?

Examination of methods of conducting and controlling private enterprise which keep it from furnishing jobs or income or opportunity for one-third of the population is long overdue on the part of those who sincerely want to preserve the system of private enterprise for profit.

No people, least of all a democratic people, will be content to go without work or to accept some standard of living which obviously and woefully falls short of their capacity to produce. No people, least of all a people with our traditions of personal liberty, will endure the slow erosion of opportunity for the common man, the oppressive sense of helplessness under the domination of a few, which are overshadowing our whole economic life.
http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/faculty-research/new-deal/roosevelt-speeches/fr042938.htm

Truly a great speech. A must read for FDR fans

[Oilwellian]

165. The end of that speech is still relevant today

Once it is realized that business monopoly in America paralyzes the system of free enterprise on which it is grafted, and is as fatal to those who manipulate it as to the people who suffer beneath its impositions, action by the government to eliminate these artificial restraints will be welcomed by industry throughout the nation.

For idle factories and idle workers profit no man.

[Mnpaul]

170. The whole thing is still relevant today

Conservatives are still trying to replay 1929 in an attempt to get different results.

You know what Einstein said about that

[JDPriestly]

179. They are fixed on the Gilded Age.

[JDPriestly]

178. Please post the speech in its own thread. That's something all Democrats should read

especially now.

Thanks. Great find. Great post.

[MannyGoldstein]

211. +1nt

[Janecita]

150. Presente!!!

[OnyxCollie]

151. FDR Democrat* here.

*sans Japanese internment.

[Jake2413]

152. yes here....count two

[Gold Metal Flake]

153. Hillary 2016!!!

LOL, J/K.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

440. LOL! I did a "Wait, what?!"

[santamargarita]

154. My grandfather voted for him. He just turned 21...

[0nirevets]

155. Checking In! I stand with FDR

FDR, the sanest, strongest, US President.

[hotrod0808]

156. Still here...

...and waiting for some truly progressive candidates to vote for.

[motocicleta2]

158. Here. nt

[hootinholler]

160. Hoover sent the Army

Roosevelt sent his wife.

[roguevalley]

161. here

[ieoeja]

162. K&R

[Liberal_Dog]

164. Here!!

K & R.

[lastlib]

166. Reporting for Duty, Sir!

(Although I profess to be more an RFK Dem, to be truthful...)

[Efilroft Sul]

167. Permission to come aboard.

[dgibby]

168. I'm an FDR Indy. n/t

[TheProgressive]

169. I normally do not do 'check in' threads...

But, yes I am a FDR/JFK democrat...

[myrna minx]

171. I'm here!

[JDPriestly]

173. Here.

[lemondropkid]

174. 3rd Generation

And always will be.

Brothers have strayed. Hoping they will come back.

[hrmjustin]

398. Welcome to DU lemondropkid!

[alberg]

176. Present.

[appal_jack]

177. Yo.

I favor the New Deal for the long haul.

-app

[greatlaurel]

180. Checking in, but I am more ER or even further left than that.

My dad was a republican all his life, but I remember him telling me many times that FDR saved the country from civil war. He spoke with great respect for FDR. His opinion made an impression on me, because he had no use for most other Democrats.

FDR was called a traitor to his class. He was their savior. If it had not been for him, most of them would have been swinging from light poles. He kept the lid on, therefore, in some ways sowing the seeds that allowed the return to near total control of the plutocrats.

The one thing FDR did that has great merit and expanded his power was that he helped rural Americans. The modern Democrats have forgotten how important rural areas are to maintaining power at the state and local levels.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

181. Yes, still here.

No matter how many 3rd-Wayers disapprove.

[boomerbust]

183. YO

[harmonicon]

184. He died more than 30 years before I was born.

My grandparents were FDR Democrats. They're dead too. Can we please have some contemporary role-models now?

[Mnpaul]

229. He died more than 30 years before you were born

but you are probably still using infrastructure put in place by his programs.

[harmonicon]

236. I think FDR was great...

but we can't keep living in the past.

[Mnpaul]

238. Actually we have to go back to what worked in the past

The path we are on now is a road to ruin. Turning the country upside down just so that a few can become extremely wealthy is destroying our country. We are heading right back into what our forefathers left England to escape.

[haikugal]

287. + All too true!! n/t

[Lars39]

185. Me!

Raised by Depression era parents, I'd damn well better be raising my hand.

[Granny M]

191. Present. nt

[LindaCollins11]

192. FDR Democrats,

HERE

[susanr516]

195. I'm here nt

[FredStembottom]

196. Been here all along.

Stunned by the intractable, damaging policies in Washington, but still here, still hopeful..... Somehow.

[allan01]

197. re:FDR Democrats, check in here!

raises hand . i resemble that remark . I will support ANY candidate who will protect the countrys saftey net and deal with the 1% a blow . fdr must be turning in his grave .

[kurtzapril4]

198. Proud LIBERAL Democrat checking in! n/t

[davekriss]

200. Check, here!

[pampango]

201. We all know his liberal domestic policies (the New Deal) but he was an internationalist also.

From his last inaugural address in 1945:

We have learned that we cannot live alone, at peace; that our own well-being is dependent on the well-being of other nations far away. We have learned that we must live as men, not as ostriches, nor as dogs in the manger.

We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community.

We have learned the simple truth, as Emerson said, that "The only way to have a friend is to be one."

We can gain no lasting peace if we approach it with suspicion and mistrust or with fear. We can gain it only if we proceed with the understanding, the confidence, and the courage which flow from conviction.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/fdr-fourth-inaugural/

[CRH]

202. I'm still here, but the politics around me sure has changed! n/t

[Gemini Cat]

203. I am

and always will be.

[Triana]

205. Yo. n/t

[Laelth]

206. Here. k&r n/t

-Laelth

[Wait Wut]

207. Sorry.

My DIL is Japanese. If they had tried to take her from us I would've fought to the death to protect her. Yes, FDR was a good President. But, he had his faults just like every single President before and after. I am not an FDR Democrat, Clinton Democrat, Obama Democrat or any other 'Insert President's Name Here' Democrat.

I'm a Democrat. Period. I'll focus on today and not cry over the past.

[Eleanors38]

208. Why, of course!

[Buzz Clik]

209. This country have evolved in many ways since FDR.

We need to do so as well.

Hard core liberal here, but not an FDR Democrat.

[sabrina 1]

225. Sure, we got Reagan, Bush 1 and 2 and we sure did 'change' but I wouldn't call it evolving,

devolving is more like it. How do you suggest we Democrats join the devolvement of this country? Hardcore Democrat here who will never leave this party to the Third Way infiltrators.

[Buzz Clik]

261. What would you call it if we fell back to the philosophies and policies of FDR? Evolution?

No.

My point stands.

[sabrina 1]

276. After the last 30 years, I would jump up and down for joy and call it a miracle. We would be rid of

1) Big Banks running our government. Our president would do what FDR did, listen to woman like Perkins who understood the working class and its importance to this country, rather than asking for advice on the working class from its enemies, ie, Wall St.

2) People would come first for a change.

3) Money would be spent on JOBS rather than bailing out corrupt, Wall St criminals.

4) Our president wouldn't give a shit about what Right Wingers thought of him, he would USE their ridiculous garbage against them instead of validating it by talking about 'compromise'.

5) The elderly, the poor, the disabled and dependent children would be respected as they are in other civilized nations. After working and contributing to this nation all of their lives they would not to fear being discarded, or having their benefits cut or right wingers getting their hands on what belongs to them.

6) We would not tolerate talk from morons like Alan Simpson about Veterans and he sure would not be appointed to any position of power.

But you didn't explain what is wrong with Democratic policies ....

[Buzz Clik]

290. WWII ...

-- Inernment of Japanese and Germans
-- Megarich family running the country
-- Firebombing Dresden

Not quite perfect.

So, yeah. Really good things, really bad things. We move on. It's 2013.

[sabrina 1]

305. Guantanamo

Drones

Innocent detainees held for years, even though declared innocent.

War Criminals and Wall St. Criminals protected

Afghanistan

Mercenaries still in Iraq

Foreign Policy, not quite perfect.

But there is no contest with domestic policy.

FDR: Jobs, retirement fund, poverty among seniors down from over 60% to 9%

American middle class grows and prospers

Today?? Unemployment, no jobs program to deal with it.

Proposed cuts to Main St's only safety nets.

Bailouts of Wall St criminals who crashed the economy

Illegal Foreclosures continue while Wall St grows even wealthier.

Etc Etc

Bring back FDR Democrats!

[Buzz Clik]

309. Ah. Lesser of two evils. Isn't that how we got here?

By the way, Obama did not give us Guantanamo, or the drones program, or Afghanistan, or mercenaries in Iraq. Your list was trimmed quite a bit. And, I'm glad to see that you listed so accurately the unemployment problem:



Four years in, FDR's unemployment was still twice that of Obama's.

Don't you feel even a little odd of listing Bush programs for our current set of ills but listing only the things you like about FDR?

[sabrina 1]

315. I left out a lot of Bush's policies, like the Patriot Act, the vile FDDA eg.

Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy which simply required doing nothing, were extended. Continuing to contribute to the deficit which they played a large role in creating.

Have any of Bush's policies been rescinded yet?

Give me the list and I will give credit where it is due.

FDR began the process of creating jobs a few weeks after he was sworn in as president.

You really do not like Democratic policies, do you? Can you post just one Democratic policy you like?

[Buzz Clik]

317. "Have any of Bush's policies been rescinded yet?" You have got to be kidding.

Are you telling me you cannot think of one of Bush's policies canned during the Obama administration?

[sabrina 1]

319. I'm asking you to list them so I can give credit where it is due.

The Patriot Act maybe? I know it had a sunshine clause??

Bush tax cuts? That too an expiration date?

Just provide a list and I will be happy to list them.

So which Democratic policies do you support? So far you seem a little peeved by what are signature Democratic Party principles, I believe you referred to them as regressive, or something.

[Buzz Clik]

321. I'm done playing. You listed a bunch of Bush's policies and attributed them to Obama...

... as justification for pining away for a 70 year old administration.

If you have no idea what Obama has or has not done, why would I want to continue this conversation?

[sabrina 1]

323. You thrashed an iconic Democratic President and signature Democratic policies and then laughingly

tried to attribute anti-democratic values to others.

No, you're still playing, although not very well, so I can see why you want to quit.

Now to correct your poor attempt at distortion, although I doubt it's necessary. DUers, Democrats, are pretty smart and are most likely laughing at your feeble attempts.


I listed Bush policies that are still in effect. Let me repeat a little more loudly this time.

I LISTED BUSH POLICIES THAT ARE STILL IN EFFECT AND ATTRIBUTED THEM TO THE PERSON WHO INITIATED THEM. THAT WOULD BE BUSH.

Did you miss the word 'BUSH' attached to them??

I asked you for a list DEMOCRATIC POLICIES you support. No answer.

I asked you for a list of BUSH POLICIES that have been rescinded. No answer.

Anytime you want to retract your anti-Democratic statement that Democratic Policies need to be trashed, or whatever it was you said, feel free.

Meantime, I can keep playing as long as you want, but I will never, ever ignore anyone who trashes the Democratic Party's, MY Party's, core principles.

[haikugal]

294. Well done!!!

He didn't 'explain' anything...he just stopped by to punch a hippy

[sabrina 1]

360. And he missed.

He tried hard though to thrash democratic values. As Sen. Byrd said once when he literally wiped the Senate floor with his Republican opponent and he noticed his opponent had quietly exited ... 'What happened to my opponent'?

The problem for them is they have bought into the right wing lies that Liberal Democrats are weak, easily bullied morons. Nothing could be further from the truth. The toughest people in American are and always have been, Liberal Democrats.

Lol, well I had fun!

[haikugal]

362. Absolutely! LOL

They do seem to think we're weak don't they? I guess they do believe all the right wing hype and that's a shame, really! LOL Well done girlfriend...we're tough and we won't quit!

[sabrina 1]

371. In a way, it's good for Democrats. They come on strong, expecting that what Rush told them was true

then find themselves seeing stars after their encounters with democrats. This has been my wonderful experience for ten years.

Totally agree, we are relentless! Lol!

[bvar22]

249. Which of the following do you believe are obsolete?

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be [font size=3]established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being."---FDR, excerpted from the Economic Bill of Rights

Which of the above do you believe we should now discard
because "we have "evolved"?

PLease note that FDR specified the above as Basic Human Rights to be protected and administered by our Government of the People,
and NOT as COMMODITIES to be SOLD to Americans by For Profit Corporations.

[Buzz Clik]

258. Hm.

Those are great quotes. I like them very much.

I also like the Gettysburg address. However, I do not wish to be governed according to all the principles set forward by Abe Lincoln.

We evolve. That is not to say we simply walk away from our heritage and basic principles, but we cannot be mired in the past.

[bvar22]

278. That response wan't even a Swing-and-a-Miss,

it was Duck and Run.

Why don't you try to be a little more specific about which of those values are NOW obsolete in the New Democrat Centrist Party?





[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[Buzz Clik]

282. pfff.

I am disappointed when someone criticizes the form of my response rather than the substance.

Take off. I'm done with you.

[bvar22]

326. Where is the substance in your response to which you are referring?

I couldn't find ANY?

I specifically ASKED you for substance.
You supplied none.
Hence, my very appropriate response
AGAIN asking you to post some "substance".

Specifically, WHICH of those FDR Values do you believe we have moved beyond?

[graham4anything]

216. I'm an LBJ,FDR, Obama,Carter,John Lindsay,Jerry Brown,JFK,RFK,Dr.King,Hillary democratic

I am also a Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cory Booker, Deval Patrick, Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, Janet Reno, Bill Clinton, Bruce Babbitt, Paul Simon, Richard Gephardt, the legendary Tom Daschle, Ann Richards, Allard Lowenstein, Bella Abzug democratic person.

and many, many more.

attempting to divide democratic people is not democratic.
in fracture, there are no democratic presidents.
FDR compromised and worked with the other side himself.

Even more liberal, more people populist LBJ had to have republican votes to offset the type of democratic person I am not-the George Wallace, David Duke dixiecrats.

[bvar22]

252. That explains a lot about you.

Policy, Issues, Democratic Party Values, and the Direction of the Democratic Party don't matter?
If it has a "D" after its name, then you are Good with it?


[font size=3]
Centrism!!!!...because its so EASY!
You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING,
and get to insult those who DO!!!

[graham4anything]

257. LBJ was far more liberal than FDR. I love both. Both needed other votes.

Social issues. Racism, anti-sexism, homophobia, freedom of religion,
freedom for Gays to marry, those are the issues of importance.

In my book
Lincoln #1
FDR #2
LBJ #3 (almost tied at #2)
Obama #4
Carter #5

tbd-Hillary.

in my bottom 10 is Eisenhower and Reagan and 41, 43, Ford and Truman.

Adlai Stevenson should have been President instead of Ike.
Can't believe any democratic person liked Ike.
That is stupendous to think. Without Ike, there wouldn't ever have been Reagon.

[bvar22]

274. Ike was WELL to The Left of our current leadership on MANY issues.

[grahamhgreen]

254. In other words, you have no core?

[graham4anything]

260. JVL is perhaps my favorite. Single greatest populist and union man ever.

He got more votes in 1972 in the few primaries he was in, then eventual nominee, McGovern.

[MotherPetrie]

217. Here!

[Maw Kettle]

221. I'm one!

My mom was born in 1932 in Oklahoma. She told me one time that her first memory was of being hungry and there just wasn't anything to eat. She always said FDR saved their family from starvation. Too bad most of her sisters and brothers and their kids are now rabid right-wing Republicans. I guess they've forgotten who saved their butts back in the day.

[Autumn]

268. Welcome to DU Maw Kettle. Almost the same story here.

One of my earliest memories is sitting on Grandpa's lap in a small Oklahoma town listening to Eisenhower on the radio. Grew up on stories of FDR and the depression from my Mom. All the relatives left in OK are rabid right wingers. Can't figure that out.

[hay rick]

416. Welcome aboard.

Love the name. Haven't thought about Ma and Pa Kettle in a long time. I still remember the Saturday matinees for a quarter. We need all the FDR (real) Democrats we can get.

[dembotoz]

222. before my time but damn i support what he did

[Jack Sprat]

224. Present. n/t

[Neoma]

226. Yep.

[Armstead]

227. FDR, Wellstone, Harkin.... and many other "Liberal Democrats" Democrat here

[FairWinds]

228. Count Me In Too

Highly recommend that y'all visit the FDR Little White House in Warm Springs, GA.
It's really inspiring.
http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/presidents/roosevelts_little_white_house.html

[Warpy]

232. Plenty of us

We older Boomers especially remember what it was like growing up with all the New Deal protections in place. Some of us even got sent to college and didn't have to work full time or go into debt because our parents were paid enough to pay our way. Yes, you heard that right, no debt.

We remember an economy that worked for nearly everybody who gave it a go. Even marginal workers like janitors were paid enough to feed their kids on one job. Some of our dads worked for the same place until they were 65, then retired with a pension, Social Security and savings. Our grandparents stayed in their own homes and always had enough food for everybody on holidays.

The New Deal was the best deal workers in this country ever got and it worked well in practice. Even the rich managed to get richer, although they did so more slowly and had to pay close attention to what was happening. Downward mobility affected their class if they were spendthrifts who didn't take care of their investments.

So yes, I'd say most of us around my vintage are FDR Democrats. That's because we realize he created a basically Keynesian economy that actually worked.

If rigid sex and ethnic segregation hadn't been the rule, the 1950s might have been even better. Well, we're working on fixing those things so if we get a Keyesian president and Congress again, we'll be well on the way to building a country that is worth all the jingoism and feel good propaganda we got fed as kids in school.

[zeemike]

233. I'm here....K&Rin

And I am not going anywhere.

[Carolina]

235. Checking in

[Liberalynn]

237. Here

[Cleita]

240. I'm late to the party but count me in.

I wish we could resurrect him to finish his fourth term.

[padruig]

241. Present ...

Present and ready for duty.


"It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world."

Franklin D. Roosevelt,
January 11, 1944
In his message to the Congress of the United States on the State of the Union

[TinkerTot55]

308. Also here.

FDR got it started.
It's up to us and our children to regain lost ground, and push the rest of his agenda FORWARD.
Amen to what Padruig posted.

[Graybeard]

242. John Nance Garner was VP when I was born.

That was a hell of a long time ago. I have no memory of course of FDR as President. Growing up in elementary school it was always Harry Truman in the White House.

In my teens it was Ike, I was drafted by JFK and I served my Army hitch with LBJ as Commander In Chief.

You've got me feeling really, really old.
.
.

[pangaia]

243. You bet, Manny.

How was the Pawtucket game?

[MannyGoldstein]

419. Awesome!

They won on Thursday and Sunday, both games we went to.

Thanks for asking!

[decayincl]

244. Yes

I am here. Too many have forgotten where these social programs originated...and why they were necessary.

[dwilso40641]

246. I'm here

[demwing]

248. Damn straight

can we find a way to mobilize?

[grahamhgreen]

253. Yes. And we want to expand, not contract, SS!!!

[old guy]

255. Here.

[dajoki]

256. Yes I am!!

[DLevine]

262. Here. Thanks Manny. nt

[Phlem]

263. Here!

-p

[4_TN_TITANS]

264. We're here...

just apparently not in government anymore.

[gwade46]

265. Here!

[hrmjustin]

400. Welcome to DU gwade46!

[Blue_In_AK]

266. Me.

[October]

267. Here!

[Cirque du So-What]

269. If I had to self-identify as a certain type of Democrat

I'd consider myself a Henry Wallace Democrat, although I'm a great admirer of FDR as well. I often wonder how the world would have turned out if Henry Wallace hadn't been edged out as FDR's VP in 1944...perhaps no Hiroshima & Nagasaki, more reasonable relations with the USSR and therefore no 'cold war,' no Korean War, etc.

[Smarmie Doofus]

270. More FDR than anything currently on the scene. Although...

.... a certain MASS Senator is looking pretty good these days.

[PADemD]

271. Here!

[Aldo Leopold]

272. Present!

K&R!

[Marr]

273. Here. /nt

[Jim Lane]

275. FDR's record wasn't perfect, but better than anything seen since.

He didn't tackle racial issues. His economic success has that one blot on it, when he listened to the austerians of his day, moved to a contractionary fiscal policy, and caused the 1937 relapse from the recovery.

On that latter point, though, we can cut him some slack, because even the experts didn't understand the economy as well as we do today. No such excuse can be made for contemporary politicians who say that, in a recession, the government must tighten its belt.

[bvar22]

324. Perhaps you missed this in his 1944 State of the Union Address:

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which [font size=3]a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.--FDR, 1944

"a second Bill of Rights under which [font size=3]a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

This was delivered in the State of the Union Address, establishing Racial Equality as a national Goal, not just for the Democratic Party, but for the entire United States.
I am unable to find an official statement endorsing Racial Equality as a national goal that predates FDR's 1944 SOTU Address.
While FDR didn't "solve" the problem, he put us on the road to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the above statement.

There were also a number of other racial barriers that were lifted during WW2.
FDR approved the first Black Officers serving in the US Military,
as Hero Fighter Pilots. This was NOT a necessity due to lack of white volunteers.
Driving a P-51 was a peach assignment ANY soldier would grab. This was a HUGE step forward
against much resistance.

[Jim Lane]

333. FDR made a nice speech and took some very minor steps.

It's too much of a stretch to give Roosevelt credit for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I don't give much weight to a forceful speech without significant policy followup. Roosevelt didn't even integrate the armed forces -- that was done under Truman.

FDR's most notable action on matters of race was the internment of Japanese-Americans. (Don't tell me that it was a racially neutral measure against people who might be loyal to an enemy country. There was nothing comparable done with regard to German-Americans and Italian-Americans, with their distinctly white complexions.)

Admittedly, any politician is constrained by the times in which he or she must act. Roosevelt could not have single-handedly brought about the civil rights revolution. Given his immense popularity, however, he could and should have done a lot more than he did. Blacks were better off because of his administration, but that was almost entirely because of measures that benefited everyone and didn't specifically address America's race problem.

The heart of the matter is that Roosevelt went along with the long-standing implicit bargain between the Democratic Party and white racists in the South. The Democrats, under the rubric of states' rights, agreed not to make any serious effort to disrupt the racial status quo in the South; they turned a blind eye to the Jim Crow laws, the disenfranchisement, and even the occasional lynching. In return, the South voted Democratic. (The eleven states that had joined the Confederacy gave FDR every one of their electoral votes in every one of his four elections.)

One could argue that Roosevelt had too much else on his plate and just couldn't undertake any fundamental attack on racial inequality. I don't agree, but even someone taking that position would have to concede that his overall record on racial matters should be counted as one of his failings.

[bvar22]

361. A journey of a thousand miles...

Find a reference to Racial Equality as a Basic Human Right that pre-dates FDR's,
and you might have an argument.
Since you can't, it is a valid statement to say that FDR began the journey TO the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and ESTABLISHED Racial Equality as a Democratic Party Issue directly connected to the Basic Human Rights detailed in the Economic Bill or Rights.

To attack the Japanese Internment as an act of "racism" on FDR's part,
you will have to provide supporting evidence of a long held prejudice against the Japanese People.
You might be able to accuse him of Hysterical Xenophobia,
but given the circumstances in the USA immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor, even THAT would be a stretch.

There was NO threat of a German attack on the US Mainland at that time,
but there was certainly the very real threat of an imminent attack on the West Coast by Japan,
a country that had just successfully wiped out our entire Pacific Fleet.
So your comparison to the Germans is not valid.

Please remember, FDR had no reliable radar, no satellites, and no functioning outposts.
The entire defense of the West Coast was civilians and untrained military standing on the California beaches with binoculars.

As Commander-in-Chief, faced with a brand new World War on two fronts,
and no "INTEL" other than we no longer had a Pacific Fleet,
A Congress that was SCREAMING for the Round Up of the Japanese Spies,
Hysteria and Panic in California,
(Speilberg's 1941 was an understatement),
reports of Japanese saboteurs cutting arrows in the sugar cane fields pointing the way toward vulnerable military installations,
roving bands of vigilantes attacking anyone who looked Japanese in California,
even lynching some,

...given ALL that, and a brand new World War on Two Fronts,
as Commander-in-Chief, I might have decided to Take them OFF the Board and put them someplace safe until I have the time to deal with it.

FDR didn't have to be a "racist" to make that decision.
So see if you can find some supporting evidence before making that accusation.
Can you document pre-Dec7th ethnic slurs against the Japaneses?
Can you document instances where he referred to the Japanese as an inferior people or culture?
Can you source comments before Dec 7th where he called them derogatory names?

If so, them you might be able to build a legitimate case against FDR as a "racist",
but if all you have is the Internment,
you ain't got much.

I am not saying it was right.
I am saying that that alone is not proof of racism.

[Jim Lane]

428. I didn't say FDR was a racist. You introduced that word into the discussion, not me.

I said, "He didn't tackle racial issues" and that "he could and should have done a lot more than he did ... (to) address America's race problem." As I indicated with my reference to the Democratic Party and the South, this was probably a product more of political calculation than of personal racism.

As for the Japanese-American internment, the East Coast also had hysteria and people on hills with binoculars. German submarines had been preying on American shipping in the North Atlantic; they sank a Navy destroyer, the USS Reuben James, several weeks before Pearl Harbor. (Apologies to anyone who just got a Woody Guthrie earworm.) My understanding of the historians' consensus is that the treatment of Japanese-Americans had a significant racial component. It's clear that many Americans back then were racists, FDR didn't stand up to the widespread bigotry the way he should have.

The internment wasn't my main point, though. My bottom line is that, even if the internment had never happened, the New Deal would have to be assessed as a disappointment (at best) on racial issues. Where we disagree is that you give more weight than I do to his enunciation of a goal.

[FiveGoodMen]

277. Count me in!

Once upon a time, being a Democrat meant something.

[bvar22]

279. Phew! (wiping sweat from brow) Finally made it to the bottom.

bvar22 HERE!
a Mainstream, Center, FDR/LBJ, Working Class, Liberal, loyal Democratic Party activist for over 45 years,
NOW labeled a "Fringe Leftist", "Fucking Retard, and "Right Wing Troll" in the New Democrat Centrist Party.
I haven't changed.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[timdog44]

311. You sound like you are writing about me.

A sad day in America was October 25, 2002.

[Auntie Bush]

281. Me, me, me here.

[CanonRay]

284. Count me in!

[patrice]

286. or else, you'll get called a "Fucking R----d" . . . Four fingers!!!!

[avaistheone1]

288. Always and forever!

FDR!!

[CrazyOrangeCat]

289. Still here.

An orange cat, hanging out with the yellow dawgs.

[Greybnk48]

291. Here! I'm glad I have company. n/t

[truebluegreen]

292. Proudly checking in!

[navarth]

293. Hell yes

Count me in

[UnrepentantLiberal]

298. Yo!

[tpsbmam]

299. Checking in, rec'ing & kicking! nt

[spedtr90]

300. Here!

[npk]

302. Check & K/R n.t

[Bluenorthwest]

304. I was raised to admire both Franklin and Eleanor, my father counted them as personal

saviors of his family during the depression, and he always, always emphasized Eleanor. When I was a kid and asked why Presidents only got two terms and FDR had four, he said 'that was fine with me, two for Franklin and two for Eleanor'. He felt Mrs Roosevelt was the driving force for egalitarian thought in that couple.
FDR and AER, Franklin Delano and Anna Eleanor. I'm a FRD/AER Democrat.

[tex-wyo-dem]

306. Right here, Manny! nt

[RKP5637]

307. Here! n/t

[Vincardog]

310. here

[limpyhobbler]

312. Close enough.

Really I'm independent but am happy to campaign for any FDR Democrats.

[rwsanders]

313. Another one here!! Funny there was another forum for "status quo" dems that only had about 40...

Responses and about 10% of those were negative.

[Stevepol]

314. Yo!

Newer Deal

[Walk away]

316. My Great Grandmother Bessie O'Shay was a cook for the Roosevelts at Hyde Park.

She was filled with stories about the whole family while we were growing up. She went on to marry a doctor and have twelve children...every one a Roosevelt Democrat!

[calimary]

320. Here. Those ideas are STILL good.

And they STILL work. When nobody has any money to spend to stoke the economy in the private sector (and those who do insist on hoarding it and not allowing it to circulate), then the only entity able to spend any money is the public sector. Government.

[ZombieHorde]

322. I really like many of the policies he championed,

but I have a real hard time with the race camps. I don't expect perfection, but that wasn't even close to cool.

[whathehell]

325. Proud to check in!...n/t

[carolinayellowdog]

327. from my first vote for McGovern till now, I support the democratic wing of the Democratic Party

count me in

[mettamega]

328. hi :-)

[Jakes Progress]

330. Here.

[reformist2]

332. Here!

[jtuck004]

334. I guess that's as close as I can get, though my heart tells me that might have been the

beginning of too much conciliation, the path down which the power that worker's have was co-opted while they were led into the servitude we are in today.

But yeah...

[jwirr]

335. Born and raised in FDR's world - first historical memory - crying on my crying mother's lap when he

died.

[MissDeeds]

338. Here!

Better a new deal than a raw deal.

[AnneD]

344. Enough Hopium....

Stop blowing smoke up my skirt. I am tired of the Raw deal. Time for a New Deal

[oxymoron]

341. Check!

[HomeboyHombre]

345. Loud and proud, brother. Can I get a witness?

Can I have an AMEN!

We need another FDR right now--Howard Dean and Bernie Sanders in 2014.

[denbot]

346. Kick for F.D.R.

And Eleanore too!

[Honest_Abe]

347. Here!

[louslobbs]

348. Here in Palm Springs CA n/t

Lou

[RoccoR5955]

349. Checkin' in.

Even though I wasn't alive when FDR was president, I feel like I am an FDR Democrat.
I live near Hyde Park, and have been to the library many a time.

[ColesCountyDem]

350. Present! n/t

[davidthegnome]

352. Yep.

I wish I had been alive during his Presidency. Must have really been something else. From the history classes I've taken and the books I've read, I think he was awesome. He did some things I didn't like much (the internment camps being chief among them) but overall, I think he had the right idea about many things.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

353. Here!

5 heart attacks, one stroke maybe two. Used to be a small biz owner, no more. Retired and on SSID. Health problems fixed and ongoing care at VA.
Dead if it wasn't so.

[Jack Rabbit]

354. Check

[Third Doctor]

355. Here!

[MAD Dave]

357. How about a TC Douglas left winger from Canada

Count me in!

[idahoblue]

364. Present

[lordsummerisle]

365. k&r n/t

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

366. Just an idea...

Let this be a thread that never dies. Keep it up as long as we can.
Manny ya deserve it.

[maddiemom]

367. Count me in.

[Agony]

368. Yes! sigh...

[Ken Burch]

369. Here...and I still wish FDR had kept Henry Wallace on the ticket in '44

He'd have won by at least as large a margin, if not larger, and the Cold War(and the pointless conflicts in Korea and Vietnam) might never have happened.

[rurallib]

370. YO!

[LongTomH]

373. Sir! Here Sir!

[Dpm12]

374. FDR Dem checking in here

n/t

[Ninga]

377. You mean I'm not alone???

[rhett o rick]

378. I am not out there. Well my partner says I'm out there.

[NorthCarolina]

379. Present! nt

[emsimon33]

380. Here

[Babel_17]

381. Your check, sir (nt)

[dorkzilla]

382. Present and proud!!!!

Sadly, I don't think there will ever be another one like him.

[LeftTurnOnly]

383. Right here! Time for another New Deal :P

FDR has always been one of my biggest heroes

[mtasselin]

385. Here

We are here, but when we vent these candidates not every question gets answered, very slippery.

[dmr]

386. Proud Liberal here; and am thankful for FDR's place in our history.

I don't want to imagine how this country would or would not have fared under anyone else during the Depression and the Second World War.

I am eternally grateful for the opportunity to work for and earn my Social Security benefits.

During my working years, the knowledge of Social Security (and Medicare) gave me a sense of peace.

Today, not only does that sense of peace continue as it provides me shelter; my Medicare keeps me alive.

Thank you, President Roosevelt, and many thanks to the Democratic Liberals of yesterday.

NO CPI!

[Indyfan53]

388. Present!

I've had it with this BS from the fascist right.

[cantbeserious]

389. All Present

eom

[frogmarch]

390. Checkin' in!

[Utopian Leftist]

392. Bring back the 2nd Bill of Rights . . .

before the right brings us back a 2nd bill!

[Fearless]

393. Oh yes.

[99th_Monkey]

394. Presente ~nt

[TransitJohn]

397. Checking in!

eom

[AAO]

399. FDR was my BFF

[HatTrick]

401. Present, and reporting for duty. Sir.

[Rain Mcloud]

402. FDR? Fuckin' A!

Hell,i would settle for Ike or Truman at this juncture.

[KeepItReal]

403. Holla at ya boy!

[blkmusclmachine]

404. And the NEW DEMS/Third Way/Blue Dogs

can check in at RedState or FreeRepublic.

[L0oniX]

422. Actually ...I thrive from their hatred toward me. n/t

[kentuck]

405. I guess that would be me?

[dflprincess]

406. Here!

[scarletwoman]

407. I suppose I'm close enough to count...

I was born in 1949 into a family of lifelong Democrats, and FDR was already dead and gone when I was growing up. But I was aware of how my family was affected by FDR's New Deal policies. My maternal grandfather was on a WPR road-building crew in Alaska for a time. Everyone in both sides of my family were blue-collar union workers.

My earliest political education was my dad explaining to me that the Republicans were the party of the rich, and the Democrats were the party of the working folks. I've voted a straight Democratic party ticket for my entire voting life.

On the other hand, I'm actually more of a leftist than a liberal. And it seems to me that part of FDR's motivation was to save capitalism from itself and head off the possibility of any truly leftist, socialist strains taking hold in this country.

That's okay - I know there's no real left in the U.S. I make do.

sw

[duffyduff]

408. Here. n/t

[txwhitedove]

409. Right here! Raised in Oklahoma, both FDR and Eleanor were heroes in our house.

[Euphoria]

410. I'm here and ready to move forward

[tiredtoo]

411. Just checking in here

K & R

[nomorenomore08]

412. If that's as close as we could ever get to real social democracy, then I'm in.

I'm also a two-time Obama voter who's just sick and tired of all the bullshit. I almost feel like apologizing.

[Omaha Steve]

413. Like I could add more to all this

[MannyGoldstein]

420. It's amazing, isn't it!

I didn't realize so many people actually knew what FDR was about, let alone were fans.

Great to know!

[Libertas1776]

415. Checking In*

Added an asterisk only because I am technically registered as an independent for the simple reason that i find the current Democratic party establishment to be too conservative, but vote Dem always (think Bernie Sanders). That being said, huge FDR Democratic supporter here. Franklin and Eleanor's portraits adorn my wall at home! We need New Deal Part Deux right friggin now!

[leftstreet]

418. DURec

[stupidicus]

421. It's too bad he isn't haunting the WH

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_of_Christmas_Yet_to_Come

[fascisthunter]

423. we are the majority

but you wouldn't know it by the way think tank trolls get to play their bs sophistry on this site. Too bad we don't have enough money to pay for our own trolls... maybe then we'd get the same treatment. Fairness my ass.

[retired rooster]

424. yes sir...

I be loving me some FDR, warts and all.

[Slit Skirt]

425. nt

[Lifelong Protester]

426. I am about as 'out there' as they come...

count me in...

[ellie]

427. FDR is my favorite president

Growing up, I went to Hyde Park multiple times with my parents.

[senseandsensibility]

429. Checking in. We have nothing to fear but fear itself.

Could solve all of our problems if you think about it.

[ralps]

431. I'm here!!

[diabeticman]

434. + 2 my Wife and I

[whatchamacallit]

441. Better late than never. Yo!

[Harry Monroe]

443. Present!!

[raouldukelives]

447. A little belated but well worth a K&R. nt

[sabrina 1]

450. 'Holy Cow! The New Deal Still Has Some Fans' ~ It does, they are called DEMOCRATS!

[Union Scribe]

452. Shit, how did I miss this thread.

k/r

[ornotna]

458. Late to the party

but, hell yes!

[betterdemsonly]

459. I'm here!

n/t

[GCP]

460. Here

Hell yes.

[Generic Other]

461. No question

and don't forget the influence of Eleanor.

[LeftishBrit]

462. This Attlee Labourite feels a lot of kinship with the FDR Democrats!

[RiverLover]

464. Is it too late to check in here?

Hope not!

Franklin Delano Roosevelt:

"Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education."

"Not only our future economic soundness but the very soundness of our democratic institutions depends on the determination of our government to give employment to idle men."

"I believe that in every country the people themselves are more peaceably and liberally inclined than their governments."

“A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned how to walk forward.”

“The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government.”

“True individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.”

“We are trying to construct a more inclusive society. We are going to make a country in which no one is left out.”

“A nation that destroys its soils destroys itself. Forests are the lungs of our land, purifying the air and giving fresh strength to our people.”

“Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.”

“Prosperous farmers mean more employment, more prosperity for the workers and the business men of every industrial area in the whole country.”

“We continue to recognize the greater ability of some to earn more than others. But we do assert that the ambition of the individual to obtain for him a proper security is an ambition to be preferred to the appetite for great wealth and great power.”

“But while they prate of economic laws, men and women are starving. We must lay hold of the fact that economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings.”

LOVE this thread!