Ronald Reagan on FDR

[txradioguy]

In simply terms of being a LEADER--an inspirational figure, an effective administrator--Reagan was probably the second best president IMO in the 20th century next to FDR.

The only thing that allowed FDR's New Deal policies to be deemed a success was WW II.

That war is the only thing that pulled us out of the Great Depression.

The policies of FDR only prolonged the depressed state of the country.

Reagan loved and respected the Constitution as the FF's wrote it.

FDR wanted to expand number of justices on the supreme court in order to ram through his New Deal policies that the SCOTUS had deemed unconstitutional.

Now tell me again about FDR being such a great president?

[txradioguy]

Quick quiz...which President's DoJ was this said about?

The flurry of new law swamped the Justice Department with more responsibilities than it could manage.[14] Many Justice Department lawyers were ideologically opposed and failed to influence either the drafting or review of much of the White House's legislation.[15] The ensuing struggle over ideological identity increased the ineffectiveness of the Justice Department. As the Interior Secretary complained, the Attorney General had "simply loaded it [the Justice Department] with political appointees" at a time when it would be responsible for litigating the flood of cases arising from legal challenges.[16]
Compounding matters, the Solicitor General, proved to be an ineffective advocate for the legislative initiatives .[17] His successor proved to be little better.[14]
This disarray at the Justice Department meant that the government's lawyers often failed to foster viable test cases and arguments for their defense, subsequently handicapping them before the courts.[15] As the Chief Justice would later note, it was because much of the legislation was so poorly drafted and defended that the court did not uphold it.[15]

[CaughtintheMiddle1990]

The only thing that allowed FDR's New Deal policies to be deemed a success was WW II.

That war is the only thing that pulled us out of the Great Depression.

The policies of FDR only prolonged the depressed state of the country.

Reagan loved and respected the Constitution as the FF's wrote it.

FDR wanted to expand number of justices on the supreme court in order to ram through his New Deal policies that the SCOTUS had deemed unconstitutional.

Now tell me again about FDR being such a great president?

You mean spending on the war pulled us out? Spending? Wait....

Reagan upheld and saved Social Security, for one. Reagan didn't put us back to 1789, but then again, he was also sane and realized 1989 wasn't 1789.

The number of federal justices has grown over time, you realize this right? FDR was not the first to try to enlarge the court.

[txradioguy]

You mean spending on the war pulled us out? Spending? Wait....

You want a serious discussion or do you want to act like a retarded troll and get treated as such?

Your crack about spending makes you look like an ass.

The war ramped up production of all war materials. Which meant that shuttered factories suddenly were running round the clock shifts which meant that people had to be hired to fill those shifts. Shipyards...auto assembly plants textile mills...all suddenly had a need for employees.

Military aged males were being drafted or running as fast as they could to the local recruiter to sign up. Being in the military counts as being employed by the way.

You starting to get the picture now of why the war saved the country and allowed FDR's New Deal to be seen as a "success" when it really wasn't?

Reagan upheld and saved Social Security, for one. Reagan didn't put us back to 1789, but then again, he was also sane and realized 1989 wasn't 1789.

Huh? Speak English.

The number of federal justices has grown over time, you realize this right? FDR was not the first to try to enlarge the court.

I realize that. But you have to look at WHY FDR was trying to enlarge the court. It wasn't for any noble cause. He wasn't trying to do it because it was necessary.

He was threatening to do it so he could pack it with justices that would rubber stamp his New Deal policies.

You might read history in your classes kid...but you don't seem to really understand it yet.

There's a big difference.

[linda22003]

I thought FDR was an evil dictator who hated America and turned America into a Communist wasteland like the USSR. Why would Ronald Reagan, who many here say was the greatest president of the 20th century, ever say a kind word about him post his conversion to Conservatism, much less while he was President?

There was a time when people didn't demonize each other because they had political disagreements. It was a more civilized time in political discourse, it ended before you were born, and it's probably not coming back.

[fettpett]

There was a time when people didn't demonize each other because they had political disagreements. It was a more civilized time in political discourse, it ended before you were born, and it's probably not coming back.

:eek: another person that has no clue about history. I suggest you go back and take another look at those so called "civilized political discourse". Particularly Jefferson-Adams, Jackson-JQ Adams, 1860 election, Roosevelt-Taft-Willson, and some others. What we see as hyper-partisan is NOTHING compared to those elections.


As for FDR, while not an evil man his polices were very damaging to the US economy, as I said before, the 1932 crash was far worse than that of the 1929 crash. The difference being that the Government stopped the run on the banks that would have happened otherwise. Between Hoover and FDR's "interventions" they prolonged the Depression or caused it. The difference was that Hoover was not charismatic enough to keep the Presidency, where FDR was, not only that be he was effective in using the Radio to calm people's fear's.

[Adam Wood]

I thought FDR was an evil dictator who hated America and turned America into a Communist wasteland like the USSR. Why would Ronald Reagan, who many here say was the greatest president of the 20th century, ever say a kind word about him post his conversion to Conservatism, much less while he was President?

Well, you just beat the shit out of that strawman. Good job.

I don't think I've ever heard anyone calling FDR an "evil dictator" or anything of the like. He did, however, push the bounds of the Presidency faaaaarrr beyond what it had been before, way beyond what the Founders intended for the Presidency, in a grab for Presidential power that has never been seen before or since. If George W. Bush had tried to pack the Supreme Court the way that FDR tried, his head would have been on a pike at end of the the Arlington Memorial Bridge. You are right that he was inspirational. He mastered the power of radio broadcasting, which tremendously increased the reach of the President like never had been done before. Good for him for doing that, but that doesn't change the fact that the New Deal was, by and large, a gigantic, expensive, feel-good failure that still wrongfully gets credit for ending the Depression to this very day.

You'll note in your own quotation of Reagan that what he was going after was the Great Society, which was and is a tremendous failure and far more responsible both for the draining of our coffers and for the degradation of our society. This officially turned the safety net into a hammock (h/t to Boog, where ever you are), and THIS is what Reagan fought against the most. That, and the Soviets.

[linda22003]

:eek: another person that has no clue about history. I suggest you go back and take another look at those so called "civilized political discourse". Particularly Jefferson-Adams, Jackson-JQ Adams, 1860 election, Roosevelt-Taft-Willson, and some others. What we see as hyper-partisan is NOTHING compared to those elections.

I'm well aware of the 1800 elections, and the Grover Cleveland "Ma! Ma! Where's my Pa?" and all of that. I'm also aware that not everyone in public office has behaved that way. It doesn't excuse bad behavior, and it also drives the best people out of the political field -- who wants to be subjected to that sort of thing when they don't have to?

[fettpett]

I'm well aware of the 1800 elections, and the Grover Cleveland "Ma! Ma! Where's my Pa?" and all of that. I'm also aware that not everyone in public office has behaved that way. It doesn't excuse bad behavior, and it also drives the best people out of the political field -- who wants to be subjected to that sort of thing when they don't have to?

I agree, however you said that there was a more "Civilized" time of political debate and elections. My point was that there never has been and never will be.

[Arroyo_Doble]

I agree, however you said that there was a more "Civilized" time of political debate and elections. My point was that there never has been and never will be.

No one has been bludgeoned on the Senate floor lately so that's a plus.