HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Sanders, LBJ, JFK, Ike, F...

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:19 PM

Sanders, LBJ, JFK, Ike, FDR, and Teddy Roosevelt -- rank them from most Socialist to least Socialist

My ranking (with 1 being the most Socialist):

1. FDR
2. LBJ
3. Teddy Roosevelt
4. Ike
5. JFK
6. Sanders

Here's why I rank them in this order:

1. FDR

FDR successfully campaigned for president in 1932 on offering Americans a “New Deal,” which included

* the Works Projects Administration, a job creation and infrastructure rebuilding program or urban and rural renewal
* Tennessee Valley Authority, a job creation and infrastructure rebuilding and clean energy generation program
* the Civilian Conservation Corps, a job creation program dedicated to the environment
* the Civic Works Administration, a job creation and infrastructure rebuilding program with additional civic works goals
* labor reforms to promote minimum wages, maximum hours, and price controls
* mortgage reform and relief
* farm aid and subsidies
* federal relief to crashing state and municipal governments
* shutting down all banks and re-opening them under new regulations
* Securities Exchange Commission to regulate Wall Street well beyond all prior regulations
* Glass-Stegall Banking Act to break up and regulate the banking industry and to insure depositors

During his first term, FDR followed up the New Deal with the Social Security Act to provide support for the unemployed and retired funded by a new payroll tax, and the National Labor Relations Act to confirm rights of workers to unionize and bargain collectively and to strike when necessary.

In his 1936 re-election to the presidency, FDR ran with the endorsement of the the Social Democratic Federation. The keystone accomplishment of FDR's second term was the Fair Labor Standards Act, which created a minimum wage and set maximum work hours.

FDR's third and incomplete fourth term were mainly occupied by WWII and -- toward the end -- his failing health. Yet in 1941, FDR passed the Fair Employment Act by Executive Order at the request of the request of Philip Randolph, then the Socialist Party's chief advocate for African-American equal labor rights.

2. LBJ

I think of LBJ and the flip-side of the Jimmy Carter coin. Jimmy Carter may not have been one of our best presidents, but he was surely one of our best people who ever served as president. LBJ, by contrast, may or may not have been such a great person, but any flaws are more than redeemed when you consider how he accomplished so many unbelievably important and progressive goals as part of the "Great Society" and "War on Poverty" programs, which included

* Medicare
* Medicaid
* the Voting Rights Act
* the Civil Rights Act
* the National Endowment for the Humanities
* the National Endowment for the Arts
* the Public Broadcasting Act
* the Immigration and Nationality Act
* the Economic Opportunity Act creating the Office of Economic Opportunity to federally fund anti-poverty efforts
* Head Start program and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Act
* VISTA
* the Job Corp
* the Legal Services Corp

No president other than FDR successfully passed so much legislation to use the government and society's collective resources to better promote the general welfare and equality and economic justice in our American society.

3. Teddy Roosevelt

I have previously posted about how Teddy Roosevelt dedicated his presidency to the pro-Socialist policies of curbing the power of large corporations, supporting the right of workers to unionize, passing strict and unprecedented regulations on the pharmaceutical and banking industries, and creating entirely new federal governmental agencies for the protection of the environment (including turning private acreage into public lands). I will not repeat that discussion here, but I will focus on his great post-presidency progressive advocacy.

TR formed the Progressive Party and ran as its first presidential candidate. The Progressive Party's 1912 platform convention and platform advocated

* expansion and aggressive enforcement of antitrust and anti-monopoly laws
* greater regulation of and federal oversight of businesses
* regulation of Wall Street securities trading
* an eight hour workday
* federal workers' compensation
* curbs on anti-union strike-busting
* regulation of lobbyists and reform of the business-government-lobbyist revolving door
* enhanced revenue generation through federal income taxation and estate taxation
* limiting the role of businesses in political campaigns
* greater governmental transparency with new requirements for open records and meetings
* direct election of Senators
* campaign finance reform
* a National Health Service
* Social insurance for the handicapped, the elderly, and the unemployed
* primary elections for federal office nominees
* voter rights to recall elected officials and judges
* voter rights to referendum elections
* voter rights to bring ballot initiatives
* minimum wage laws for female workers
* nationwide women's suffrage (long before the Republican or Democratic Parties supported that it)
* farm aid

4. Ike

Like FDR in his latter years, Dwight Eisenhower's full potential as an advocate of pro-Socialist domestic policy was abridged by his need to focus on foreign policy. While many Republican contemporaries loathed FDR and his New Deal, Ike's domestic policies left the New Deal largely in place notwithstanding great pressure from within his own party to dismantle the New Deal:

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history."

Under Ike, the top marginal tax rate was 91 percent. These taxes funded the construction of an almost unimaginably expansive public interstate highway system that was the envy of the entire world.

Ike also fought long and hard to direct capital from the bloated military to fund social programs:

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people."

5. JFK

JFK comes in fifth because his work was tragically interrupted. I almost gave him an "incomplete," but LBJ carried out so much of what JFK started that JFK warrants some significant consideration. Much of LBJ's Great Society had its origins in JFK's "New Frontier," which included -- along with JFK's other legislative prioities

* expansion of the Fair Labor Standards Act and minimum wage laws
* expansion of Social Security
* an Executive Order protecting federal employees with collective bargaining rights
* the School Lunch Act and a precursor to the food stamp program
* Aid to Families with Dependent Children
* the Medical Health Bill for the Aged, a precursor Medicare
* the Equal Pay Act
* the Clean Air Act

6. Sanders

In the context of these great American presidents, what is it that Bernie Sanders is asking of America that has so many Republicans and other wealth-hoarders outraged?

Sanders will

* stop corporations from shifting their profits and jobs overseas to avoid paying U.S. income taxes
* create a progressive estate tax on the top 0.3 percent of Americans who inherit more than $3.5 million.
* tax Wall Street speculators
* gradually increase the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $15 an hour
* create 14 million jobs or more by investing in infrastructure and youth jobs programs
* ensure that women are paid the same as what men earn for the same work
* provide free public college education
* enact a Medicare for all single-payer healthcare system
* enacti universal childcare and prekindergarten
* protect the right to unionize and bargain collectively
* break up monopolistic financial institutions

Is this platform really all that radical? These have been our American goals for a century now; goals supported by Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt and Ike as well as Democrats like FDR, JFK, and LBJ. Now is the time to fulfill our greatest American promises.

64 replies, 6887 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 64 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sanders, LBJ, JFK, Ike, FDR, and Teddy Roosevelt -- rank them from most Socialist to least Socialist (Original post)
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 OP
mmonk Oct 2015 #1
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #8
mmonk Oct 2015 #20
Enthusiast Oct 2015 #23
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #29
HassleCat Oct 2015 #2
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #4
whatchamacallit Oct 2015 #3
Armstead Oct 2015 #5
mmonk Oct 2015 #7
NCarolinawoman Oct 2015 #25
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #11
WI_DEM Oct 2015 #6
jeff47 Oct 2015 #10
WI_DEM Oct 2015 #30
jeff47 Oct 2015 #31
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #32
bvar22 Oct 2015 #44
rhett o rick Oct 2015 #9
Demoiselle Oct 2015 #12
cui bono Oct 2015 #13
Fawke Em Oct 2015 #14
cui bono Oct 2015 #15
bvar22 Oct 2015 #16
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #33
bvar22 Oct 2015 #45
jfern Oct 2015 #17
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #18
jfern Oct 2015 #19
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #21
bvar22 Oct 2015 #35
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #36
bvar22 Oct 2015 #46
Dont call me Shirley Oct 2015 #22
Enthusiast Oct 2015 #24
NCarolinawoman Oct 2015 #26
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #34
bvar22 Oct 2015 #50
bvar22 Oct 2015 #55
MyNameGoesHere Oct 2015 #27
appalachiablue Oct 2015 #28
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #43
FSogol Oct 2015 #37
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #38
Go Vols Oct 2015 #39
liberal_at_heart Oct 2015 #40
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #41
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #42
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #48
Attorney in Texas Oct 2015 #62
bvar22 Oct 2015 #47
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #49
bvar22 Oct 2015 #51
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #52
bvar22 Oct 2015 #53
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #54
bvar22 Oct 2015 #56
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #57
bvar22 Oct 2015 #58
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #59
bvar22 Oct 2015 #60
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #61
bvar22 Oct 2015 #63
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #64

Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:27 PM

1. No, not radical. America has forgotten.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #1)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:14 PM

8. We need to remind them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #8)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:45 PM

20. Agreed. I try my best everyday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #8)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:52 PM

23. Plus one to the absolute Max!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #23)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 10:25 AM

29. The only way Sanders can be painted as a fringe candidate is to ignore history. We must not let that

happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:28 PM

2. What is socialism?

 

LBJ promoted his Great Society program, which was not very socialist. It's classic liberalism. Anyway, it's a good point that the Sanders platform is not really very radical. We have shifted so far to the right that programs like Social Security and the Peace Corps would not even pass Congress today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HassleCat (Reply #2)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:38 PM

4. Socialism is governmental regulation of the marketplace, and the use of collective assets to create

public works for the overall good of society.

A public highway built with taxpayer funds is socialism; a tollway constructed by a private venture and run for profit is not.

A public school system to provide free education is socialism; for-profit learning institutions are not.

A publicly-funded fire department that puts out everyone's home fires is socialism; a subscription-based fire department is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:30 PM

3. Yes! K&R

What a great post!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:39 PM

5. Today Sanders goals are considered either utopian or "communistic"

 

And that's by Democrats. If FDR or LBJ (without Vietnam) or TR were around today, they'd be considered part of the "fringe left." Even Ike would be suspect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #5)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:53 PM

7. Ike was considered suspect by the John Birch Society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #7)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:58 PM

25. Yes, they called Ike a communist. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #5)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:47 PM

11. If you compare Sanders' platform to the New Deal, the Great Society, Ike's public interstate highway

system funded with a 91% marginal tax rate on the country's most wealthy, or Teddy Roosevelt's expansion of the government for the purposes of regulating industry and for preserving our public lands, you can only reach one conclusion:

Sanders' platform falls well within the great American mainstream.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 04:39 PM

6. LBJ in domestic policy was even more progressive than FDR

1.LBJ
2.FDR
3.Obama
4.Truman
5.JFK
6. Carter


For all his faults LBJ was passionate about helping the poor and his record proves it--with landmark legislation from Civil Rights, Education, The War on Poverty and Medicare, just to name a few.

Truman is higher up not because of what got passed but for what he proposed--he called for National Health Insurance as early as 1948 and a far-reaching Civil Rights Bill. He also continued the New Deal policies of FDR.

JFK was more interested in foreign policy than domestic and his record shows it. He dragged his feet for over two years on Civil Rights until Birmingham. He passed the same type of tax cuts that Reagan eventually did lowering tax rates on the wealthy. He proposed Medicare, but didn't really push it--many of his domestic programs he watered down so as not to displease the Southern Democrats who held sway over committees.

Carter, who I think was a better president than given credit for, was not a liberal, however, in most of his economic policies. He did advocate and signed a substantial hike in the minimum wage, signed a watered down Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act, and created the Department of Education. However, on energy policy he was ahead of his time and was effective in passing a comphrensive Energy Program that Reagan ultimately dismantled.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WI_DEM (Reply #6)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:23 PM

10. So Obama who passed non-single payer is above Truman

because Truman tried to pass single-payer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #10)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 10:34 AM

30. No because the ACA is one of the most progressive bills ever passed

Sorry, I work with people getting them enrolled and I see that it works for most and how grateful they are to have it. It also might eventually pave the way for Single Payer one day.

No reason to be rude and say I'm ranking Obama ahead "because Truman tried to pass single payer."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WI_DEM (Reply #30)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 10:37 AM

31. I'm asking for your reasons, not being rude.

As for "one of the most progressive bills ever passed", I have a very hard time believing "you have to pay the private health insurance industry" is a progressive position.

The ACA's far better than the status quo, but that's more of a measure of how bad the status quo was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 11:19 AM

32. In fairness, ACA significantly reduced the number of uninsured and greatly improved access to health

care.

I think the argument could be made that Sanders' platform is more progressive in terms of changing the status quo than JFK's New Frontier and also argued Obama ranks close to JFK in terms of changing the status quo.

I think Obama will never be in the same league with FDR, LBJ, TR or even Ike, but he is certainly in the top ten in terms of most progressive presidents since the turn of the past century although he might not qualify for the top 5. Obama governed well to the left of Bill Clinton and he has accomplished more progressive legislative goals than Carter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WI_DEM (Reply #30)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:24 PM

44. Mandating that every American BUY a product from a FOR PROFIT corporation that:

*Manufactures NOTHING

*Provides no useful service

*Keeps NO inventory

....is NOT what I call "Progressive".
It is a straight REPUBLICAN (conservative business friendly) plan.

Now, if the ACA had included a national Public Option,
owned by The People and available to everyone,
then it might qualify.

If you remember during the 2008 debates, Obama insisted that any plan must include a Public Option,
because THAT will keep the Insurance Industry accountable.
He publicly ridiculed Hillary's plan for Mandates.

The new regs are applaudable...IF they are enforced.
As far as I know, no Watch Dog Agency with teeth has been created to enforce these regulations. There is also no national complaint agency to monitor the quality of the services. The consumer is STILL on his own to file a lawsuit and take the Insurance Monster to State Court, which can last YEARS and cost the consumer much money trying to fight these vultures.


The Public Option must be a National program, because no state has a risk pool great enough to spread the risk and make it competitive with the For Profits.
Any individual state that tries to compete with the Major For Profits will never be able to cover their relatively few customers at a competitive price. However, a National Public Option would have enough weight to make some demands in pricing, and actually save the consumer money.
The ACA stipulates that the individual state run Public Option MUST make a profit from year 1.


I wonder if Hillary has realized that Obama passed HER (and Romney's, and the Heritage Foundation) Health Care program after ridiculing her for her proposal during the debates.

In order to make the ACA "progressive", the National Public Option is a necessity.
Without it, it is just another business friendly plan to transfer wealth to the Corporate owners & investors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:21 PM

9. Great post. Thanks. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:47 PM

12. The "ist" I admire is "pragmatist."

It seems to me that all the people mentioned have, in greater or smaller measure, arrived at practical solutions to real problems, workable answers for real needs, and they are therefore pragmatists.
Why do people flee screaming from the word "Socialist", anyway?
Socialism is a perfectly respectable and effective solution to many of our problems.
Sigh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:48 PM

13. Fantastic post!

Any Dem who uses the "socialist" meme about Sanders in any way, shape or form should be ashamed of themselves. Bernie fights for what the greatest Dems of history fought for and got done. Bernie is NOT the fringe candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #13)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:52 PM

14. I just call him an FDR-Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #14)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 05:57 PM

15. That's a good idea!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:20 PM

16. It is tough to rank these guys.

They really are interdependent.
I don't believe that FDR would have gotten very far without Teddy's Trust Busting.

Two portraits were hanging in the home I grew up in the 50s...
a painting of Jesus hanging next to FDR's official portrait.
This was later joined by JFK's official portrait.

I hated LBJ with a Purple Passion, and marched in the streets chanting,"Hey, Hey, LBJ!
How many kids did you kill today?"


It was only in later years, and gut wrenching contrast with the Party Leadership of today that I realized what a great LIBERAL Democrat he was.
AFAIC, he was the last "Democratic" President.
It is not the same today.


DURec for a well prepared, thought provoking post.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #16)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 12:03 PM

33. LBJ's foreign policy nightmare has drawn attention from his unprecedented domestic policy triumphs.

What disheartens me the most is that if you look at the post-LBJ presidents and rank their domestic policy accomplishments from a progressive perspective, you have to give serious consideration to

* the creation of Occupational Safety and Health Administration
* the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency
* the significantly enhanced standards under the Clean Air Act amended in 1970

There is a fair argument that Nixon (1) accomplished more important progressive goals than Carter and (2) was a more progressive president than Bill Clinton. I think Obama has been a more progressive president than Nixon, but that is not a conclusion beyond debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #33)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:32 PM

45. Agree totally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:21 PM

17. FDR and LBJ are obviously top 2

But not sure about the rankings of the others. Truman probably beats some of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jfern (Reply #17)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:41 PM

18. Truman was so busy with foreign policy that he didn't advance the ball much domestically. Many New

Deal Democrats (including FDR's son) tried to swing the nomination to Ike (who had no formal political party affiliation at that time) because they saw Ike as more inclined to preserve and extend the New Deal than Truman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #18)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:44 PM

19. Well, he did veto Taft-Hartly

But got overridden there.

I bet Clinton or Obama would have signed that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jfern (Reply #19)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:47 PM

21. I think Hillary Clinton and Obama would have vetoed it (I hope). Bill Clinton, I'm not so sure about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #18)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 01:32 PM

35. Building on the foundation of FDR,

Truman DID desegregate the military.
That was a huge step, and Truman caught a lot of flack. The military is monolithic, and VERY conservative....but flack didn't seem to bother Truman. He just flew right through it.

[font size=3]Leadership! "The Buck Stops HERE!" NO Excuses![/font]



FDR approved the creation of an all black fighter squadron (Tuskegee Airmen).
For the first time in American History, black pilots attended Officers Candidate schools, and held officer's ranks. Military protocol dictated that they be called "Sir" and saluted in public.

That was also a huge step, and allowed Truman to later completely desegregate the military.

This movement was later followed by LBJs Civil Rights Act of 1964.
I see all 3 stages as an unbroken, interdependent progression.



Equal Opportunity, Equal Protection, Equal access for everyone---NO exceptions.!!!!
FDR said much the same thing in his SOTU of 1944.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be[font size=3] established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed."[/font]---FDR, SOTU, 1944



Of course, this has not been accomplished yet. We have a long way to go.
It is depressing to see that we have been losing ground in this area.
The Welfare "reform" Act, the disproportionate number of Black Men confined to our prisons, combined with the economic crash that has (of course) disproportionately affected the Black Communities has shown how FAR we are from the goals first set by FDR in 1946.
We still have much work to do.

Equal Opportunity, Equal Access, and equal protections for EVERYBODY...NO EXCEPTIONS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #35)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 03:14 PM

36. I didn't mean to imply that Truman did no good (he did plenty of good things). I was saying that he

did not accomplish much (as compared to FDR before him or Ike/JFK/LBJ after him) in terms of promoting a pro-Socialist program. That is, he made relatively small strides in the goals of (1) advancing the ways in which the government regulates the marketplace for the betterment of society and (2) calling upon the public's resources to create public works for the benefit of society in general (such as FDR's WPA or Ike's interstate highway system or JFK's space program or LBJ's PBS).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #36)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:46 PM

46. Truman faced some tough opposition from Republicans who wanted to reduce th government.

In fairness to Truman, he DID propose and fought for domestic programs that built upon FDR's New Deal.
Truman's domestic programs were called "The Fair Deal".

While dealing with immediately pressing issues, Truman also provided a broader agenda for action. Less than a week after the war ended, he presented Congress with a 21-point program, which provided for protection against unfair employment practices, a higher minimum wage, greater unemployment compensation and housing assistance. In the next several months, he added other proposals for health insurance and atomic energy legislation. But this scattershot approach often left Truman's priorities unclear.

Republicans were quick to attack. In the 1946 congressional elections they asked, "Had enough?" and voters responded that they had. Republicans, with majorities in both houses of Congress for the first time since 1928, were determined to reverse the liberal direction of the Roosevelt years.

http://countrystudies.us/united-states/history-115.htm


The above link is well worth the read.
Truman WAS a Democrat in the mold of FDR,LBJ, and JFK.


[font size=3]
"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."

---President Harry Truman
QED:2010[/font]

Truman was a real Liberal, red blooded, two fisted DEMOCRAT.
I am proud he was fighting on our side.

Of course, he was also majorly distracted by The Marshall Plan and helping the ruined countries get back on their feet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:52 PM

22. Well put together, Attorney in Texas!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 06:53 PM

24. Kicked and recommended!

Thank you, Attorney in Texas! Very well done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 07:09 PM

26. Excellent post.

Last edited Fri Oct 23, 2015, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

I loved all the environmental stuff that both Roosevelts accomplished.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCarolinawoman (Reply #26)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 12:25 PM

34. I had hopes Obama would have done some comparable game change on the environment but instead of

any dramatic change in policy, Obama has bogged down in treaties and paperwork.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #34)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 07:06 PM

50. "Obama has bogged down in treaties and paperwork."

He was also bogged down in protecting the Wall Street Banks and the Oil Corporations,
not to mention gathering new unbelievable, permanent powers for the Unitary Executive and expanding The Empire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #34)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 07:56 PM

55. Worse than that,

Obama has approves selling Oil Leases off the East Coast in environmentally sensitive areas, and in the Arctic.
He also protected BP in their crime in the Gulf of Mexico.

We got the "Drill, Baby, DRILL! President anyway.
We were given no choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 07:20 PM

27. this is mine

1.

there it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Thu Oct 22, 2015, 08:18 PM

28. K & R. Thanks for the exemplary post. This history must be remembered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appalachiablue (Reply #28)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 05:34 PM

43. If we don't remind America, who will?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 03:18 PM

37. Somewhere Eugene Debs is crying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FSogol (Reply #37)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 03:32 PM

38. Eugene Debs has been crying for the past 45 years, and this is the first ray of hope he's seen since

LBJ left office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 03:54 PM

39. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Attorney in Texas (Original post)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 04:22 PM

41. Sanders is the only Socialist on the list. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #41)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 04:41 PM

42. But he offers a more conservative platform than FDR, LBJ, JFK, Ike or Teddy Roosevelt. DLC has taken

the party hostage.

Bill Clinton ran the presidency well to the right of Nixon, while Sanders offers a platform somewhere left of Nixon but to the right of FDR and LBJ.

So whose values are traditional Democratic Party values?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Attorney in Texas (Reply #42)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:57 PM

48. No, he doesn't.

 

You have a skewed view of history if you honestly believe that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #48)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 10:50 PM

62. Name three things that Sanders proposes that are more Socialist than what FDR or LBJ actually passed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #41)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:56 PM

47. Bernie is a "Democratic Socialist".

That is not the same thing as a "Socialist".

Of course, you have already been told this many times,
but insist on using your faulty reference, while KNOWING that it is a distortion.
You do yourself no favors. Each time you do that, you "credibility" (if you have any) suffers.

Do you know the difference between a "Democratic Socialist", a "Socialist", and a "National Socialist"?
It doesn't appear that you do, or you wouldn't use these terms interchangeably.

Willfully distorting information on this discussion board is not OK.
This is dishonest,
and reprehensible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #47)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:59 PM

49. It has the same foundational viewpoint

 

Control of the means of production by the government. That is the ultimate goal of ALL forms of socialism regardless of which version a socialist falls into after the multiple schisms within the movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #49)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 07:21 PM

51. You made some fantstic (fantasy) claims in your post.

Please point out where Bernie Sanders has promoted anything close to
"Control of the means of production by the government."

It is painfully clear that you need to :

1) Check Bernie's proposals for ANYTHING that references taking control over private industry, or NationalizingANY American business.
Please post links to any references you can find.


You are extremely deluded (or well programmed) if you believe that
"Control of the means of production by the government. That is the ultimate goal of ALL forms of socialism." Actually, you are confusing Socialism with Communism...a common mistake among conservatives and shallow thinkers.


Have you ever been to Europe,
especially the Scandinavian countries?

I suggest a Summer tour for you in these countries to further your "education".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #51)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 07:22 PM

52. Sanders called himself Socialist.

 

HE did so without the "Democratic" qualifier for most of his career.

The foundational basis of all socialist philosophy is government control of the means of production.

I need look at nothing more about the guy. I will never vote for him under any circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #52)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 07:35 PM

53. So a "label" or a "buzz word" is all you need for selecting your candidate?

That is shallow, and not very smart.
You should dig a little deeper,
or not....if you are happy not knowing, and voting on hunches or a distorted reality.
That is how the Democratic Party became Republican Lite instead of "DEMOCRATS".



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font]
[/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center]
[/font]



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #53)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 07:36 PM

54. I don't vote for Republicans, Libertarians, and Socialists. Period. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #54)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 08:19 PM

56. Well that means you could not have voted for FDR, Truman, JFK, or LBJ.

Good for you to admit which side you are on.
That takes some bravery on a Liberal Democratic Board.

Can I make these assumptions that follow directly from your posts:

*Corporation can do whatever they want without regard to Human Rights, Worker Rights, and Environmental Rights. They answer to nobody except their share holders.

*Free Trade is GOOD because that lets Corporations outrun Human Rights, Labor Rights and Environmental Protections in order to maximize quarterly profits .
(Capital will ALWAYS be able to outrun The People.)

*Once a corporation corners the market, they are free to charge what ever they want for necessities.

*Corporations are totally within their rights to pay workers the smallest wage possible without benefits or job security. (SEE: WalMart)

You really need to go study up on "Socialism", "Democratic Socialism", "National Socialism", and "Communism".
Clearly, you conflate these very different economic systems as all the same.
You could NOT be further from the truth.

Take a few weeks or months (or years), and study up on these very diverse systems.
That will save you future embarrassment posting at DU.


I don't want to live in your world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #56)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 08:46 PM

57. All four were Democrats. Not one was a Socialist like Sanders. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #57)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 08:59 PM

58. You carry conservative DLC water around here.

Go ask the Republicans if FDR was a "Socialist".
You are trying to do the same thing to Bernie that the Republicans tried so hard to do to FDR.

BTW: Do you have any interest in policy at all?
You seem to be built out of Buzz Words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #58)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 09:02 PM

59. I carry reality here. The Socialists DESPISED FDR.

 

Your lack of knowledge about political history is telling. The Socialists opposed FDR more than the Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #59)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 09:14 PM

60. That is BECAUSE FDR was a Democratic Socialist.


DUH!

You REALLY need to go study American history,
and the history of the Democratic Party.

You ARE trying to do the very same thing to Bernie that the Republicans tried to do to FDR.

WORD!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #60)

Fri Oct 23, 2015, 09:27 PM

61. No, he wasn't

 

No matter how much you wish to aler history, you cannot.

FDR was NOT a Democratic Socialist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #61)

Sat Oct 24, 2015, 02:02 PM

63. Help clear this up.

What made FDR a "Socialist" and not a Democratic Socialist?

....and have you bothered to research the difference yet,
or still just sticking with the shallow Buzz Words & Labels?

Have you ever considered discussing "policy" instead of low grade Name Calling?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #63)

Sat Oct 24, 2015, 02:47 PM

64. FDR was neither. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread