Replies

FDR did not free half of Europe. America did. After Pearl Harbor, the actions taken by the US would have been the same under almost any President. We had a good industrial base and a willingness to serve. Those were American traits, and can not be attributed to FDR.

The victory over the axis powers was not being opposed by anyone of political and social import after Pearl Harbor. As such, he does not deserve a great deal of credit, as he was not faced with the daunting task of rallying public support, as Lincoln did.

He broke the accepted practice of serving no more than 2 terms. When faced with a Supreme Court that correctly found his proposals unconstitutional, his reaction was to attempt to amend the Constitution to add a jurists that would allow him to do as he pleased. He designed and implemented policies which not only did not shorten the depression, they thwarted the ability of market forces to restore the economy to health. He created the precedent that the people of the United States should first look to government for the solutions to their problems.

FDR is given credit for being President at a difficult time, and for being President at a time when there were positive improvements. But to credit him for those achievements is the same as giving Clinton credit for the economic strength that was the result of economic policies of his predecessors, and changes in technology.

FDR did not free half of Europe. America did.

And who was Commander-in-Chief of the American Armed Forces?

We had a good industrial base and a willingness to serve. That's actually not true. We were in the middle of a depression. Our industrial capacity was limited and we needed to upgrade our armed forces in a hurry.

When faced with a Supreme Court that correctly found his proposals unconstitutional, his reaction was to attempt to amend the Constitution to add a jurists that would allow him to do as he pleased.

He did attempt to amend the constitution. Today's leftists would have just sued the Supreme Court for lack of diversity.

He designed and implemented policies which not only did not shorten the depression, they thwarted the ability of market forces to restore the economy to health. He created the precedent that the people of the United States should first look to government for the solutions to their problems.

I agree with all of the above.

But to credit him for those achievements is the same as giving Clinton credit for the economic strength that was the result of economic policies of his predecessors, and changes in technology.

There is no comparison between Clinton and FDR. Clinton is a shameful disgrace who flaunted the law, couldn't be honest with his own cabinet, kidnapped a Cuban boy from a private home and sentenced him to live under Communism, murdered his own Commerce Secretary, took bribes for pardons and slept at the wheel and possibly even covered up terrorists attacks while the US faced grave threats to its civilian population.

I refuse to argue this anymore b/c I am not by any means a fan of FDR but he is deserved credit for winning WWII.