Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: henkster
"Today’s article on a far worse budget would not contain any criticism you saw 70 years ago."

This is now the election year of 1940, and if I remember right, the NY Times supported NY Republican businessman Wendell Wilkie. If you wanted a modern day equivalent to Wilkie, might I suggest: Mitt Romney?

Roosevelt's national debt in 1940 was about 42% of GDP, roughly where it had been in 1934, and the Times was clearly upset about it.

Obama's national debt in 2010 is 98% of GDP, up from 65% when the Republicans were in last charge, in 2006.

So, what are the chances that the NY Times would support a moderate Republican against even the most radical of Democrats? Well, we could ask John McCain...

7 posted on 01/05/2010 7:04:57 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: BroJoeK

Wilkie was a Hoosier, and today we’d lambast him as a RINO. On some issues he was about as far left as FDR. Kind of a replay of today; no real conservatives around. Your comparison of Wilkie to Romney is fairly accurate. No way the slimes endorses Romney in ‘12.

In 1940, despite FDR’s Depression-prolonging deficits, the United States still had enough wealth and manufacturing capacity to finance and produce material to win a global war. Today, with the massive debt we’ve already piling up with no end in sight, and with little or no manufacturing base, I doubt we could do the same.

Food for thought.


10 posted on 01/05/2010 11:57:34 AM PST by henkster (tagline under reconstruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson