To: nkycincinnatikid; truthfreedom
Truman? Seriously, guys? As 20th century Dems go, he was probably the best of the lot.
Think about it. He authorized a nuclear strike... not once but twice. Saved hundreds of thousands of American lives by doing so. Sure, the Japanese were in no position to retaliate, and thus other presidents didn't have things quite so easy. But Truman deserves some credit for being a gutsy commander in chief, nonetheless.
To: irishjuggler
Truman? Seriously, guys? As 20th century Dems go, he was probably the best of the lot. Unquestionably.
At the very least, Truman qualified as a "good man". Name the Democrat presidents and nominees since who earned that stature.
146 posted on
07/17/2011 10:04:19 PM PDT by
okie01
(THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
To: irishjuggler
Well, I thought about putting (probably) on Truman. Arguments can be made for Truman, though.
To: irishjuggler
Looking back, if I was a voter in 1948, I probably would have voted for Truman. Dewey was a great DA, a pretty good governor, but a lousy candidate for President. He practically gave away the election to Truman.
156 posted on
07/18/2011 12:46:16 AM PDT by
princeofdarkness
(The Obama Administration is circling the wagons. But the Truth Indians are using flaming arrows.)
To: irishjuggler
Truman defined in one word.
Yalta.
And btw, Eisenhower who did a magnificent job in the European theatre considering who he was taking orders from,
argued against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Truman, the Senator from Organized Crime.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson