Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans praise New Deal socialism
The Liberty Committee ^ | 3-22-2004 | The Liberty Committee

Posted on 03/22/2004 8:02:21 AM PST by jmc813

Most liberty-loving Americans consider Franklin D. Roosevelt the single worst president of the 20th century, even with stiff competition from the likes of Woodrow Wilson and Lyndon Johnson. FDR was perhaps the most openly socialist leader ever to occupy the White House, and his policies reflected a firm belief that government should control business and redistribute wealth. His New Deal programs dramatically increased both the size and scope of the federal government, fundamentally changing (for the worse) the nation’s perception of the proper role for government in our society. Contrary to popular myth, Roosevelt helped cause the Great Depression through his monetary policies and public works boondoggles. All Americans are less free and less prosperous today as the result of Roosevelt’s presidency.

So why were congressional Republicans busy praising the man last week?

A resolution honoring Roosevelt and his "legacy" passed overwhelmingly in the US House of Representatives Wednesday. The resolution expressly praised his New Deal programs, applauded his administration's "productive partnership with private enterprise...by appointing top businessmen to run the production agencies" and repeated the lie that somehow he led America out of the Depression. The resolution ends with the preposterous assertion that "a grateful Nation and world are better off because of President Roosevelt's inimitable leadership."

The resolution was introduced by a Democrat, but Republican leaders of the House tightly control procedural rules that determine what legislation reaches the floor. The bill could not have seen the light of day without their approval. To read the resolution, go to http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/hjres87.htm .

Only five House Republicans had the integrity to vote against the resolution, while six others voted "present." Nearly 200 Republicans joined the unanimous and enthusiastic Democrats in voting to honor FDR's terrible legacy.

This vote provides yet another example that the mainstream Republican party has abandoned any last vestiges of principle and ideology. The big-government neocon faction of the GOP finds much to admire in FDR, but rank-and-file Republicans still believe in lower taxes, less regulation, and more personal liberty -- not socialism. Voters who rejoiced when the GOP took control of both Congress and the White House could not have imagined their heroes would proceed to spend, borrow, expand, and regulate even more than Clinton did! The national GOP has lost all credibility as the party of limited government, and Americans who love liberty should not be fooled by big-government socialists simply because they have an "R" next to their name.

You can see how your representative voted, as well as express your opinion about his or her vote by going to http://capwiz.com/liberty/issues/votes/?votenum=65&chamber=H&congress=1082 .


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: biggovernment; gop; irrelevant; notworthafight
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

1 posted on 03/22/2004 8:02:23 AM PST by jmc813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
2 posted on 03/22/2004 8:07:53 AM PST by Belisaurius ("Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, Ted" - Joseph Kennedy 1958)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
You can see how your representative voted,

I don't need to see how she voted - I can figure it out on my own. She's a liberal that likes to tell the voter she's a "moderate". She has said that the Constitution is like the little blue dress she had when she was five years old - "It just doesn't fit anymore". I'm sure she thinks that FDR's New Deal was a "good start".

3 posted on 03/22/2004 8:13:42 AM PST by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
After eight long years, 1932 thru 1940,as president, there were more people unemployed than in 1932. FDR did nothing to alleviate the suffering. World War 2 solved the problem.
4 posted on 03/22/2004 8:13:49 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
World War II (full of rationing, shortages, long hours, increased accidents) didn't solve the problems caused by the New Deal. The problem was solved in 1945 and 1946 after massive spending cuts and tax cuts when the war ended.
5 posted on 03/22/2004 8:16:37 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
My post was reference the depression suffering. I was there. The war brought employment.
6 posted on 03/22/2004 8:22:50 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: .38sw
WOW! References to Monica and OJ in the same quote!

In a few years, imagine how RINOs will praise Clinton. He implemented the Clinton Recovery to the Bush (41) recession. He turned deficits into surplusses. Imagine what he could have done without the VRWC. blah, blah, blah.

7 posted on 03/22/2004 8:26:46 AM PST by kdot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
Anyone who believes FDR was as great a president as they were tought by the socialist multiculturalist education system has been completly mis-led. First, if FDR was alive today i would like to commend him, for his failure to pull our country out of a depression and in turn having the skill and forsight to pay attention to the Asian Empire that Japan was building. The New Deal programs didn't work then and they still don't work today. FDR should be praised for his inability to adequately pursue economic stability, while failing to protect American interests thus dragging us into WWII.

In reality the only thing that brought this country out of depression were, first the millions of Americans who died in World War II, the economic stimulus via war, and the tax cuts and cuts in government spending in the post-war era.

and in regards to FDR, when it comes to war or Elenor...i choose war!

8 posted on 03/22/2004 8:26:47 AM PST by vmoney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kdot
References to Monica and OJ in the same quote!

LOL! That never even occurred to me!

9 posted on 03/22/2004 8:30:43 AM PST by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Ditto to these sentiments. Michael Savage, among others, has observed that today's GOP is like the Democratic Party of 30-40 years ago, ideologically speaking, while the actual Democrats have gone hard left. Ultimately, the Rockefeller wing of the GOP has won the ideological war, mainly by proclaiming that they were conservatives, too. Were the GOP not the party favoring strong national defense and our nation's interests overseas, the only reason left for voting Republican would be to prevent the Democrats from appointing Bolsheviks in black robes to the Federal bench.
10 posted on 03/22/2004 8:36:34 AM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
World War 2 solved the problem.

I'm with you on this one.

WW2 is what made this country great.

Like you, I was around in this country, when the war started, and saw what the war and the afterbirth did for this country economically.

Winning WW2 was the best thing that happened to this country from an economic standpoint. - tom

11 posted on 03/22/2004 8:48:14 AM PST by Capt. Tom (Don't confuse the Bushies with the dumb republicans. - Capt. Tom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Capt. Tom
Dems bash Bush cause there is umemployment, 5 per cent or so. FDR had 8 long years to "cure" the problem and it got worse. What did the people do? They voted him another term.

I recall his fireside "chats", in one he said he would never draft American boys to fight in foreign wars. Lying SOB. He knew full well what was coming, say anything, do anything for votes. Sounds like dems in current times.

12 posted on 03/22/2004 8:59:51 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Belisaurius
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

More apropos than you could possibly realize.

13 posted on 03/22/2004 9:04:07 AM PST by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: jmc813
Most of FDR`s New Deal programs were shot down by the USSC. Social Security is his lasting legacy and its a big one. I'd say LBJ`s liberal programs associated with advancing his Great Society programs of the 1960`s, have had more impact on America in the long run, then FDR`s or Wilson`s policies. Richard Nixon was also a big government Republican who increased the size and scope of the federal bureaucracy.

And let's forget that PresBush43 gave us the biggest incraese in the federal bureaucracy since the creation of Medicare itself. The Bush Prescription Drug Program is a waste of the taxpayers money and will be another albatross around the neck of American's for years to come.

15 posted on 03/22/2004 9:09:36 AM PST by Reagan Man (The choice is clear. Reelect BUSH-CHENEY !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
"You can see how your representative voted,"

And, he shall see how I voted come November 3rd.

16 posted on 03/22/2004 9:16:02 AM PST by WhiteGuy (Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
I never claimed otherwise....just pointing out that the war (which brought wage controls and rationining and shortages) did not cause prosperity. Did it reduce unemployment? Well...I guess it depends on how you define that word.

Superficially,, moving people from the unemployment lines and putting them in low wage and dangerous jobs in the front lines at Iwo Jima and Anzio did reduce unemployment but.....not in any genuine sense, at least, viewed in teh context of a free and prosperous market economy.

17 posted on 03/22/2004 9:27:55 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Eleanor was the socialist, not FDR. He was a politician, not an ideologue like his wife and some of his top advisors.

A case could be made that FDR through his New Deal may have saved the country from either extreme socialism or fascism (Father Coughlin and Huey Long, etc). He gave the nation hope which is something that Hoover was never able to do in four years of depression. Tariffs raised by Republicans didnt do anything to get the country out of recession but did drive it into world depression.

Talk to someone that was alive during the recession and you are unlikely to find the kind of ravid FDR hatred that you exude. FDR was not re-elected four times because he was a master manipulator. He was popular as is Social Security. By ranting against the Social Security, you marginalize yourself. That is why Republicans were not throwing a hissy fit over this. It was a differnt time with differnt challenges that required a more active central government (world war and depression). That hasnt been the case during much of the period since 1945... thus the continuing trend towards smaller government and lower taxes. 9/11 may have challenged that some.

18 posted on 03/22/2004 9:41:52 AM PST by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
Sounds like dems in current times.

Will you stop calling them dems. They are socialists.

One of my beefs with the stupid party is the republicans to this day still don't call them what they are "Socialists".

Numb skull Orin Hatch still refers to Ted Kennedy as his good friend. No wonder most Americans don't know about the socialist takeover of the democrat party. - Tom

19 posted on 03/22/2004 10:25:11 AM PST by Capt. Tom (Don't confuse the Bushies with the dumb republicans. - Capt. Tom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Capt. Tom
I prefer to call them socialists, however most here on FR see them as dems or libs.
20 posted on 03/22/2004 10:29:25 AM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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