I like to think that if TR were alive today, he would be right out front at a tea party event pounding his fist and railing against this current government.
Beck’s right on this one. Roosevelt was a progressive. He deeply distrusted business and worked hard to move the Republican party to the left. I’m not sure why Newsmax is ignoring his record.
Unfortunately, TR let the Tax genie out of the bottle with his lack of foresight and his childish, idealistic “progressivism.”. It doesn’t matter how much he might regret his mistake; we’re now condemned to pay the price.
If it were up to me, we’d erase his face from Rushmore and replace it with Ronald Reagan’s.
I agree, mostly, with Beck.
TR, far more than Lincoln, who is so often blamed, is responsible for the idea that the government is responsible for fixing our problems. While TR no doubt would be appalled by today’s intrusive government, once the idea has been accepted that “when people hurt, the government must move,” there is no logical stopping point short of full totalitarisnism.
After Lincoln, and especially after the end of Reconstruction, the federal government returned to a limited role not utterly dissimilar to what it was before the War.
Since TR the federal government has continually expanded in both size and mission. Even presidents like Coolidge and Reagan were able only to slow its growth, not reverse it.
Hoist by his own petard.
If one always "acts according to the practical needs of the occasion," it seems pretty obvious that one will constantly be expanding the role of government, as that is in general the most obvious way of dealing with any problem. A true conservative recognizes that some problems are the price we must pay for limited government, thereby avoiding the problems caused by unlimited government. This analysis leaves out the obvious issue that expanding the government to deal with "the practical needs of the occasion" seldom is all that effective at actually solving those needs.
"Making America strong and No. 1 on the world stage" is a defensible goal, but it also quite obviously requires a government that in size and scope is far beyond that envisioned by the Founders.
Theodore Roosevelt started the Progressive Party in 1912 and ran with this new party, as a 3rd party candidate when he did not get the GOP Nomination. That assured that Woodrow Wilson, the most leftist President in the 1900’s got elected.
T. Roosevelt reminds me of McCain. Had lots of money, was against Big Business, and sided with the Environmental Wackos.
From Wikipeadia:
“After two weeks, Roosevelt, realizing he would not be able to win the nomination outright, asked his followers to leave the convention hall. They moved to the Auditorium Theatre, and then Roosevelt, along with key allies such as Pinchot and Albert Beveridge created the Progressive Party, structuring it as a permanent organization that would field complete tickets at the presidential and state level. It was popularly known as the “Bull Moose Party,” which got its name after Roosevelt told reporters, “I’m as fit as a bull moose.”[63] At the convention Roosevelt cried out, “We stand at Armageddon and we battle for the Lord.” Roosevelt’s platform echoed his 1907–08 proposals, calling for vigorous government intervention to protect the people from the selfish interests.[64]
“ To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.” - 1912 Progressive Party Platform, attributed to him[65] and quoted again in his autobiography[66] where he continues “’This country belongs to the people. Its resources, its business, its laws, its institutions, should be utilized, maintained, or altered in whatever manner will best promote the general interest.’ This assertion is explicit. ... Mr. Wilson must know that every monopoly in the United States opposes the Progressive party. ... I challenge him ... to name the monopoly that did support the Progressive party, whether ... the Sugar Trust, the Steel Trust, the Harvester Trust, the Standard Oil Trust, the Tobacco Trust, or any other. ... Ours was the only programme to which they objected, and they supported either Mr. Wilson or Mr. Taft... “
“He (Roosevelt) did win 4.1 million votes (27%), compared to Taft’s 3.5 million (23%). However, Wilson’s 6.3 million votes (42%)”
So thank you Theodore Roosevelt for giving us 2 terms (8 years), of Woodrow Wilson, one of the worst Presidents in History.
You should. And then read this one
While serving as a Sunday School teacher, Teddy Roosevelt noticed one of his students sported a black eye. Roosevelt asked him if he had been fighting. The child reported that he had defended his sister against an older boy who had been bullying her. Roosevelt rewarded him with a dollar and praised his behavior.
The church elders dismissed Roosevelt shortly after this event.
Remember that TR’s generation was dominated by ruthless “robber barons” who did not hesitate to use devious means to eliminate competition.
Yeah. those 'evil' “robber barons” -- gag me. Without those "robber barons", America wouldn't have become America.
Like with those evil 'robber barons' who owned the Railroads and connected East with West. Or that other evil 'robber baron', John D Rockefeller who made gasoline available to everyone (by cutting prices) with his Standard Oil Company, which iirc kind of boosted the fledging Auto Industry. Or that Andrew Carnegie 'robber baron' fellow who made Steel and created the US Steel Company.
So yeah, shame on them. Those rich 'robber baron' bast##ds! Off with their heads.
When I was in grade school and taught about those 'robber barons' you got the impression they ate puppies for breakfast.
Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive who thinks business profits should be reinvested in the community.
B.S.
Theodore Roosevelt was a progressive and a statist.
He did not start the trend towards big government, but he certainly accelerated it, and brought it into the GOP.
He should be denounced by any conservative.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. That’s what progressives of every stripe specialize in: good intentions.
Conservatives have always had trouble with some of TR's domestic policies.
TR’s ego wrote checks that we are still having a hard time cashing.
I’d like to begin by noting that H.L. Mencken wrote a vanity press book, simple in composition, of the speeches of TR on one page, and the near identical writings of Friedrich Nietzsche on the opposite page. So when you think of the philosophy of TR, keep this in mind.
Next, TR was in many ways responsible for the overburdening federal government we have today. He had no use for the individual States at all, and saw them as just obstructing absolute federal power.
Likewise, in his “Imperial Presidency”, he had disdain for congress, to the point of sending the US navy halfway around the world, to force them to pay for its return.
His idea of taking State lands for federal parks and conservation areas, purely by proclamation, has become a nightmare for the western United States, the federal government now claiming the majority of the land West of the Mississippi, and seizing more and more land with each president.
TR also laid the groundwork for his fellow progressive Woodrow Wilson, and his nightmare image of America. So convinced of his own grandeur, he was willing to tear apart the Republican party to prevent its candidate from being elected.
More than anything else, TR is regarded as a great president solely because of his progressivism. The progressive movement made sure of that, with the help of the Hearst newspapers, especially.
Though I am loathe to even suggest it, for similar reasons today, if you can imagine the MSM demanding the face of Obama on Mount Rushmore, you can see the parallel.
What would be considered progressive now would not be progressive in TR’s time. I doubt TR would be championing the Obama agenda. TR built up the military and despised the idea of hyphenated Americans. He’d far more identify with todays conservatives than he would with liberals. I think he’d find the current liberal agenda to be radical socialist.
NO. TR was a Progressive Republican. He was a statist who, like 0bama, thinks people "made too much money." TR was no friend of individual freedom.