FDR: Soviet Stooge?

[FaninAma]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/08/03/Breaking-History-Part-1

Add this outrage to FDR's total capitulation at Yalta and one has to wonder where FDR's allegiances lay.

FDR was a socialist of the highest order and the country is still suffering the effects of policies he started.

[En_Fuego]

The Business Plot: In 1933, group of wealthy businessmen that allegedly included the heads of Chase Bank, GM, Goodyear, Standard Oil, the DuPont family and Senator Prescott Bush tried to recruit Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler to lead a military coup against President FDR and install a fascist dictatorship in the United States. And yes, we’re talking about the same Prescott Bush who fathered one US President and grandfathered another one. Smedley Butler was both a patriot and a vocal FDR supporter. Apparently none of these criminal masterminds noticed that their prospective point man had actively stumped for FDR in 1932. Smedley spilled the beans to a congressional committee in 1934. Everyone he accused of being a conspirator vehemently denied it, and none of them were brought up on criminal charges. Still, the House McCormack-Dickstein Committee did at least acknowledge the existence of the conspiracy, which ended up never getting past the initial planning stages. Though many of the people who had allegedly backed the Business Plot also maintained financial ties with Nazi Germany up through America’s entry into World War II. In 1934, the Business Plot was publicly revealed by retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler testifying to the McCormack-Dickstein Congressional Committee. In his testimony, Butler claimed that a group of men had approached him as part of a plot to overthrow Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the alleged plotters, Gerald MacGuire, vehemently denied any such plot. In their final report, the Congressional committee supported Butler’s allegations of the existence of the plot, but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten.
On July 17, 1932, thousands of World War I veterans converged on Washington, D.C., set up tent camps, and demanded immediate payment of bonuses due them according to the Adjusted Service Certificate Law of 1924. This “Bonus Army” was led by Walter W. Waters, a former Army sergeant. The Army was encouraged by an appearance from retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, who had considerable influence over the veterans, being one of the most popular military figures of the time. A few days after Butler’s arrival, President Herbert Hoover ordered the marchers removed, and their camps were destroyed by US Army cavalry troops under the command of General Douglas MacArthur. Butler, although a self-described Republican, responded by supporting Roosevelt in that year’s election. In a 1995 History Today article Clayton Cramer argued that the devastation of the Great Depression had caused many Americans to question the foundations of liberal democracy. “Many traditionalists, here and in Europe, toyed with the ideas of Fascism and National Socialism; many liberals dallied with Socialism and Communism.” Cramer argues that this explains why some American business leaders viewed fascism as a viable system to both preserve their interests and end the economic woes of the Depression.

Who knows ?

[ouwasp]

Don't want to bother looking it up, but wasn't the VP that FDR replaced with Truman a far left Lefty? So, if FDR was indeed the pinko, why didn't he just leave the vice-pinko in place? I'm guessing nobody in DC was surprised when FDR died when he did...

don't want anyone to think I'd defending Roosevelt; my grandpa and his dad were probably the only men in Oklahoma to vote against FDR 4 times...

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

FDR was a keynesian delight, expanding government and forever scaring the bejeesus out of would-be enterpreneurs and investors.

[yermom]

Yep. So scared we never innovated anything after WWII

[Skysooner]

WWII was the expansion of the military-industrial complex as well as the expansion of American influence.

[SoonerorLater]

I have a measured view on Roosevelt. He voluntarily walked into a huge mess that was the biggest economic downturn in the history of the world to that point. You've heard the metaphor that if you're holding a hammer everything looks like a
nail? As president you have the power of the executive office and a mandate to end human suffering. While I abhor an activist federal government and think Roosevelt trampled the Constitution I can at least understand his motivation. The problem with
the USA started well before FDR.

[KantoSooner]

It's a subtle thing, but I think you need to look at FDR not so much as some sort of committed socialist, but rather as someone who was committed to solving problems but whose paradigms were completely sodden with the pervasive early 20th century notion that 'socialism', 'mixed government', 'scientific management' were the wave of the future and simply the way to get things done.
For such a person, a socialist state was not so a goal as an inevitability. We tend to forget now that this mindset was still very much in control of the argument well into the dawn of the 1980's. Breaking that template was a greater triumph for Reagan and Thatcher even than their related victory over the Soviet Union.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

As president you have the power of the executive office and a mandate to end human suffering. While I abhor an activist federal government and think Roosevelt trampled the Constitution I can at least understand his motivation. The problem with
the USA started well before FDR.So, he decided to control the economy by not lowering taxes and he increased spending on government projects, instead of lowering taxes, and inspiring confidence in the private sector. What do you mean by saying you understand his motivation?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

It's a subtle thing, but I think you need to look at FDR not so much as some sort of committed socialist, but rather as someone who was committed to solving problems but whose paradigms were completely sodden with the pervasive early 20th century notion that 'socialism', 'mixed government', 'scientific management' were the wave of the future and simply the way to get things done.
For such a person, a socialist state was not so a goal as an inevitability. We tend to forget now that this mindset was still very much in control of the argument well into the dawn of the 1980's. Breaking that template was a greater triumph for Reagan and Thatcher even than their related victory over the Soviet Union.and, look at how splendidly Reagan's approach worked, setting the stage for the greatest period of prosperity the world had seen, up til the trampling of the constitution and activist federal government that has occurred in recent times.

[KantoSooner]

A mandate to end human suffering?

Where did that come from?

The President has no such duty. Further it is not the duty or the job of the Legislative or Judicial branches of government or any other department or other administrative sub-org dangling from the Federal (or state) governments.

It is, in fact, perfectly consistent for US elected and appointed officials to ignore human suffering entirely. We may ask them to look into that, but let's not conflate that with it being somehow part of their ongoing 'job'.

[KantoSooner]

and, look at how splendidly it worked, setting the stage for the greatest period of prosperity the world had seen, up til the trampling of the constitution and activist federal government that has occurred in recent times.

Are you referring to the boom resulting from Reagan's policies? Or from that resulting from FDR's?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Are you referring to the boom resulting from Reagan's policies? Or from that resulting from FDR's?haha

[SoonerorLater]

A mandate to end human suffering?

Where did that come from?

The President has no such duty. Further it is not the duty or the job of the Legislative or Judicial branches of government or any other department or other administrative sub-org dangling from the Federal (or state) governments.

It is, in fact, perfectly consistent for US elected and appointed officials to ignore human suffering entirely. We may ask them to look into that, but let's not conflate that with it being somehow part of their ongoing 'job'.

A mandate from the electorate. Things were really bad and people wanted SOMETHING done. They felt Roosevelt would do what was necessary. When you are broke and hungry philosophy goes out the window. In the end Roosevelt solved nothing but people thought he was working for them. Probably why he was elected four times.

[SicEmBaylor]

I have a measured view on Roosevelt. He voluntarily walked into a huge mess that was the biggest economic downturn in the history of the world to that point. You've heard the metaphor that if you're holding a hammer everything looks like a
nail? As president you have the power of the executive office and a mandate to end human suffering. While I abhor an activist federal government and think Roosevelt trampled the Constitution I can at least understand his motivation. The problem with
the USA started well before FDR.
2745

[FaninAma]

A mandate to end human suffering?

Where did that come from?

The President has no such duty. Further it is not the duty or the job of the Legislative or Judicial branches of government or any other department or other administrative sub-org dangling from the Federal (or state) governments.

It is, in fact, perfectly consistent for US elected and appointed officials to ignore human suffering entirely. We may ask them to look into that, but let's not conflate that with it being somehow part of their ongoing 'job'.
Absolutely correct. Well said. A nation's greatness is measured by how
its individuals come together and help each other out in times of crisis as
well as times of prosperity. A country that elects leaders to lead us around
by the nose will soon become a nation of sheep.

[KantoSooner]

A mandate from the electorate. Things were really bad and people wanted SOMETHING done. They felt Roosevelt would do what was necessary. When you are broke and hungry philosophy goes out the window. In the end Roosevelt solved nothing but people thought he was working for them. Probably why he was elected four times.

Sorry, I thought you were talking the general case and not the specific. Your phrasing of FDR's 'mission' is as good as any other. People just wanted action taken. They'd had it with Hoover and waiting for the bump to move through the snake.

[diverdog]

and, look at how splendidly Reagan's approach worked, setting the stage for the greatest period of prosperity the world had seen, up til the trampling of the constitution and activist federal government that has occurred in recent times.

do you have a shred a proof to back up this opinion?

[SicEmBaylor]

do you have a shred a proof to back up this opinion?
Which part? ;)

[SicEmBaylor]

I have a friend from Tech that once told me, "The only patriotic thing about FDR were his legs because they quit the son of a bitch."

Word.

[diverdog]

and, look at how splendidly Reagan's approach worked, setting the stage for the greatest period of prosperity the world had seen, up til the trampling of the constitution and activist federal government that has occurred in recent times.

Instead of neg speaking how about answering my f**king question.

And here is another question for you.....did Reagan raise payroll taxes?