Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

No Wonder We Elected Him To Four Terms... He Speaks To Us Still...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 12:55 PM
Original message
No Wonder We Elected Him To Four Terms... He Speaks To Us Still...
This is the FDR speech th was mentioned in Krugman's latest piece...

Franklin Roosevelt's Address Announcing the Second New Deal
October 31, 1936

Senator Wagner, Governor Lehman, ladies and gentlemen:

On the eve of a national election, it is well for us to stop for a moment and analyze calmly and without prejudice the effect on our Nation of a victory by either of the major political parties.

The problem of the electorate is far deeper, far more vital than the continuance in the Presidency of any individual. For the greater issue goes beyond units of humanity--it goes to humanity itself.

In 1932 the issue was the restoration of American democracy; and the American people were in a mood to win. They did win. In 1936 the issue is the preservation of their victory. Again they are in a mood to win. Again they will win.

More than four years ago in accepting the Democratic nomination in Chicago, I said: "Give me your help not to win votes alone, but to win in this crusade to restore America to its own people."

The banners of that crusade still fly in the van of a Nation that is on the march.

It is needless to repeat the details of the program which this Administration has been hammering out on the anvils of experience. No amount of misrepresentation or statistical contortion can conceal or blur or smear that record. Neither the attacks of unscrupulous enemies nor the exaggerations of over-zealous friends will serve to mislead the American people.

What was our hope in 1932? Above all other things the American people wanted peace. They wanted peace of mind instead of gnawing fear.

First, they sought escape from the personal terror which had stalked them for three years. They wanted the peace that comes from security in their homes: safety for their savings, permanence in their jobs, a fair profit from their enterprise.

Next, they wanted peace in the community, the peace that springs from the ability to meet the needs of community life: schools, playgrounds, parks, sanitation, highways--those things which are expected of solvent local government. They sought escape from disintegration and bankruptcy in local and state affairs.

They also sought peace within the Nation: protection of their currency, fairer wages, the ending of long hours of toil, the abolition of child labor, the elimination of wild-cat speculation, the safety of their children from kidnappers.

And, finally, they sought peace with other Nations--peace in a world of unrest. The Nation knows that I hate war, and I know that the Nation hates war.

I submit to you a record of peace; and on that record a well-founded expectation for future peace--peace for the individual, peace for the community, peace for the Nation, and peace with the world.

Tonight I call the roll--the roll of honor of those who stood with us in 1932 and still stand with us today.

Written on it are the names of millions who never had a chance --men at starvation wages, women in sweatshops, children at looms.

Written on it are the names of those who despaired, young men and young women for whom opportunity had become a will-o'-the-wisp.

Written on it are the names of farmers whose acres yielded only bitterness, business men whose books were portents of disaster, home owners who were faced with eviction, frugal citizens whose savings were insecure.

Written there in large letters are the names of countless other Americans of all parties and all faiths, Americans who had eyes to see and hearts to understand, whose consciences were burdened because too many of their fellows were burdened, who looked on these things four years ago and said, "This can be changed. We will change it."

We still lead that army in 1936. They stood with us then because in 1932 they believed. They stand with us today because in 1936 they know. And with them stand millions of new recruits who have come to know.

Their hopes have become our record.

We have not come this far without a struggle and I assure you we cannot go further without a struggle.

For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away. Nine mocking years with the golden calf and three long years of the scourge! Nine crazy years at the ticker and three long years in the breadlines! Nine mad years of mirage and three long years of despair! Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent.

For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.

We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace--business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred.

I should like to have it said of my first Administration that in it the forces of selfishness and of lust for power met their match. I should like to have it said of my second Administration that in it these forces met their master.

The American people know from a four-year record that today there is only one entrance to the White House--by the front door. Since March 4, 1933, there has been only one pass-key to the White House. I have carried that key in my pocket. It is there tonight. So long as I am President, it will remain in my pocket.

Those who used to have pass-keys are not happy. Some of them are desperate. Only desperate men with their backs to the wall would descend so far below the level of decent citizenship as to foster the current pay-envelope campaign against America's working people. Only reckless men, heedless of consequences, would risk the disruption of the hope for a new peace between worker and employer by returning to the tactics of the labor spy.

Here is an amazing paradox! The very employers and politicians and publishers who talk most loudly of class antagonism and the destruction of the American system now undermine that system by this attempt to coerce the votes of the wage earners of this country. It is the 1936 version of the old threat to close down the factory or the office if a particular candidate does not win. It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them.

Every message in a pay envelope, even if it is the truth, is a command to vote according to the will of the employer. But this propaganda is worse- it is deceit.

They tell the worker his wage will be reduced by a contribution to some vague form of old-age insurance. They carefully conceal from him the fact that for every dollar of premium he pays for that insurance, the employer pays another dollar. That omission is deceit.

They carefully conceal from him the fact that under the federal law, he receives another insurance policy to help him if he loses his job, and that the premium of that policy is paid 100 percent by the employer and not one cent by the worker. They do not tell him that the insurance policy that is bought for him is far more favorable to him than any policy that any private insurance company could afford to issue. That omission is deceit.

They imply to him that he pays all the cost of both forms of insurance. They carefully conceal from him the fact that for every dollar put up by him his employer puts up three dollars three for one. And that omission is deceit.

But they are guilty of more than deceit. When they imply that the reserves thus created against both these policies will be stolen by some future Congress, diverted to some wholly foreign purpose, they attack the integrity and honor of American Government itself. Those who suggest that, are already aliens to the spirit of American democracy. Let them emigrate and try their lot under some foreign flag in which they have more confidence.

The fraudulent nature of this attempt is well shown by the record of votes on the passage of the Social Security Act. In addition to an overwhelming majority of Democrats in both Houses, seventy-seven Republican Representatives voted for it and only eighteen against it and fifteen Republican Senators voted for it and only five against it. Where does this last-minute drive of the Republican leadership leave these Republican Representatives and Senators who helped enact this law?

I am sure the vast majority of law-abiding businessmen who are not parties to this propaganda fully appreciate the extent of the threat to honest business contained in this coercion.

I have expressed indignation at this form of campaigning and I am confident that the overwhelming majority of employers, workers and the general public share that indignation and will show it at the polls on Tuesday next.

Aside from this phase of it, I prefer to remember this campaign not as bitter but only as hard-fought. There should be no bitterness or hate where the sole thought is the welfare of the United States of America. No man can occupy the office of President without realizing that he is President of all the people.

It is because I have sought to think in terms of the whole Nation that I am confident that today, just as four years ago, the people want more than promises.

Our vision for the future contains more than promises.

This is our answer to those who, silent about their own plans, ask us to state our objectives.

Of course we will continue to seek to improve working conditions for the workers of America--to reduce hours over-long, to increase wages that spell starvation, to end the labor of children, to wipe out sweatshops. Of course we will continue every effort to end monopoly in business, to support collective bargaining, to stop unfair competition, to abolish dishonorable trade practices. For all these we have only just begun to fight.

Of course we will continue to work for cheaper electricity in the homes and on the farms of America, for better and cheaper transportation, for low interest rates, for sounder home financing, for better banking, for the regulation of security issues, for reciprocal trade among nations, for the wiping out of slums. For all these we have only just begun to fight.

Of course we will continue our efforts in behalf of the farmers of America. With their continued cooperation we will do all in our power to end the piling up of huge surpluses which spelled ruinous prices for their crops. We will persist in successful action for better land use, for reforestation, for the conservation of water all the way from its source to the sea, for drought and flood control, for better marketing facilities for farm commodities, for a definite reduction of farm tenancy, for encouragement of farmer cooperatives, for crop insurance and a stable food supply. For all these we have only just begun to fight.

Of course we will provide useful work for the needy unemployed; we prefer useful work to the pauperism of a dole.

Here and now I want to make myself clear about those who disparage their fellow citizens on the relief rolls. They say that those on relief are not merely jobless--that they are worthless. Their solution for the relief problem is to end relief--to purge the rolls by starvation. To use the language of the stock broker, our needy unemployed would be cared for when, as, and if some fairy godmother should happen on the scene.

You and I will continue to refuse to accept that estimate of our unemployed fellow Americans. Your Government is still on the same side of the street with the Good Samaritan and not with those who pass by on the other side.

Again -- what of our objectives?

Of course we will continue our efforts for young men and women so that they may obtain an education and an opportunity to put it to use. Of course we will continue our help for the crippled, for the blind, for the mothers, our insurance for the unemployed, our security for the aged. Of course we will continue to protect the consumer against unnecessary price spreads, against the costs that are added by monopoly and speculation. We will continue our successful efforts to increase his purchasing power and to keep it constant.

For these things, too, and for a multitude of others like them, we have only just begun to fight.

All this--all these objectives--spell peace at home. All our actions, all our ideals, spell also peace with other nations.

Today there is war and rumor of war. We want none of it. But while we guard our shores against threats of war, we will continue to remove the causes of unrest and antagonism at home which might make our people easier victims to those for whom foreign war is profitable. You know well that those who stand to profit by war are not on our side in this campaign.

"Peace on earth, good will toward men"--democracy must cling to that message. For it is my deep conviction that democracy cannot live without that true religion which gives a nation a sense of justice and of moral purpose. Above our political forums, above our market places stand the altars of our faith-altars on which burn the fires of devotion that maintain all that is best in us and all that is best in our Nation.

We have need of that devotion today. It is that which makes it possible for government to persuade those who are mentally prepared to fight each other to go on instead, to work for and to sacrifice for each other. That is why we need to say with the Prophet: "What doth the Lord require of thee -- but to do justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God." That is why the recovery we seek, the recovery we are winning, is more than economic. In it are included justice and love and humility, not for ourselves as individuals alone, but for our Nation.

That is the road to peace.

Link: http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/od2ndst.html

:patriot:

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. But FDR took a turn to the RIGHT after making this speech. Talk's cheap. Then. Now. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. So Is Posting... Links Please ???
:shrug:

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. 1937
Deficit hawks attacked the budget and FDR made a choice between Guns and Butter looking at Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. And He Should Have Done... What ???
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Who knows
The man beat Nazis from a wheel chair and gave us the regulatory framework that allowed for the middle class.

Some people want a God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Yes... He Also Provided The Message And A Playbook That Many Recent Dems...
seem to have run away from.

To their peril...

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. Define peril
They have gotten quite wealthy running away from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. There Are More Of Us, Than There Are Of Them...
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Yes and we are very busy stabbing each other in the eye right now nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. That's Why We Need An Effective Leader...
And unfortunately, firebrand works way better than professorial.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. One emerges they will be co-opted or killed
I'm in the watch as Rome burns itself crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Not given speeches suggesting he'd do otherwise. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Well That I Can Agree With... We Have A Guy Like That In Office Now...
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. As with FDR, I'm glad he won in November, but we need to hold him to his promises, not make excuses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Not really a guns and butter choice as much as general tight money. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. GOP made gains that year
and a lot of horse trading had to be done with the fucking southerners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. VERY true. And many were Dems!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Most were democrats
The party of Lincoln was not popular in Dixie with all those stories still circulating of us Yankees justifiably burning their cities down 70 years prior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Yes, that's why those comparisons of Dems/Reps then/now just don't work.
But I know you know that. Few here do, however. You know that too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. The current situation began in 1972
The political parties weren't nationalized effectively before than. They were mostly geographic entities with looser affiliation to a national party structure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. The convention structure still generated 'favorite son' nominations at the convention. yes. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. I assume folks here know history. The tight money policy of '37 that increased unemployment, for one
Sec. Treasury - and Hyde Park neighbor - Henry Morgenthau talked him into it.

Morgenthau's son, Robert, is the Big Time NYC federal prosecutor who just retired.

FDR then appointed an raging anti-Semite head of the Refugee Board in 1940: Breckenridge Long.

There are two for starters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frebrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
11. He definitely still speaks to me.......
I was eight months old when he made that speech.

He was President for the entire first half of my childhood, for which I am eternally grateful!





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frebrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
12. Deleted - double posted :(
Edited on Mon May-24-10 01:27 PM by frebrd





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
23. I wonder how many people accused FDR of being a corporatist when much of this didn't pass Congress?
Since a common belief around here seems to be that any compromise made in the Senate is positive proof of Obama not being liberal enough. The best parts of the New Deal only passed when FDR had a huge progressive majority in Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Governor Long
Edited on Mon May-24-10 02:11 PM by AllentownJake
Scared the fuck out of FDR...and he is the person you are looking for in the 1930s analogy.

In the 1930s the South was very democratic and a populist southern Governor, who wasn't going to fuck with their peculiur ways to the descendants of former slaves was an interesting prospect.

Remember in the South the businessman that had fucked them were Yankees.

Take a Red/Blue map of 2000 and reverse it an that is pretty much how party affiliation was in 1932 when FDR ran against Hoover.

1930s politics...oh and there were real Nazis running around...not neo-Nazi pretenders, arms of the German Government spreading Nazi ideology. Also quite a few Stalinist running around as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. So you want a Nader or a primary challenge.
Edited on Mon May-24-10 02:20 PM by Radical Activist
Sure, the outside pressure from Long had some influence, but it was one of many factors. You give Long too much credit. Congress defeated many of Roosevelts more progressive proposals in his first two years and it didn't take Huey Long to make Roosevelt try. The difference was getting rid of conservative Democrats and Republicans in a mid-term election. That's when the most got done.

Obama is also proposing more legislation that's more progressive than what the Senate is willing to pass. We don't need Huey Long to pressure Obama. We need to change the dynamics of Congress. The upcoming Blanche Lincoln primary and this year's Congressional elections are key.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. I think you confuse me with someone who believes this can be fixed
Edited on Mon May-24-10 02:21 PM by AllentownJake
Absent a total societal collapse.

I'm just enjoying the sunshine while the bombs go off sir, waiting to see if one falls on my head.

I think the country is in worse shape this time, than in 1930, when we didn't have an empire to defend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. So you're one of those who will always attack Obama's every move
because only total dissatisfaction and upheaval will bring the change you want. I believe that kind of thinking is a lazy cop-out for people who can't effectively organize support around their goals. Spreading cynicism and hopeless negativity is one of the best ways to deflate the progressive movement. Rush Limbaugh thanks you for your efforts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. My personal belief
Edited on Mon May-24-10 02:42 PM by AllentownJake
America is culturally and morally bankrupt and there is little chance of what you see around you can be saved. The President and his actions are mere symptoms of the bankruptcy. Most of his actions are like the little dutch boy trying to save the town with his thumb. The damn is about to blow, not much you can do about it.

How do I know we are up shit's creek without a paddle. The politicians know they will have high unemployment for the next 4 years at minimum with their rosey projections, not even moderate estimates. They are still extending benefits and other short-term solutions to a problem they know they will have in spades for 4 years. They aren't even talking about alternatives right now, because they can't because that might be an admission things aren't going back to the way they were and people would be very pissy about that because we are a nation of children.

We are running huge deficits and cannot sacrifice our military adventures overseas. Why? See last point.

We are hell bent on destroying ourselves becuase we can't let go of our silly idea we are supposed to rule the rest of the world.

As far as the "progressive movement" it does not exist. There is no progressive movement in this country. You have two political gangs, one a little nicer than the other.

This is not 1932, where we can build, this is 2010 with what was built is crumbling and no one has the political will or power to save it.


As far as what was gained in the 1930s...alot of good people got their heads bashed and killed to get it. I don't see that courage nor that willingness to sacrifice in 2010 from the populace...in fact I see a populace ripe for a Hitler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #32
56. I think your negativity is poisonous.
There's a reason Obama spoke about hope and took Chavez' slogan of "Yes we can!" He understands that you can't build a movement unless people have some faith and hope that change is possible. I'll write it again, Rush Limbaugh thanks you for helping him spread the kind of cynicism that destroys any meaningful movement for progress.

I sometimes write that people have ideological motivations for always assuming the worst about Obama and your post reinforces that impression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. not that Obama compromises, but that he compromises even before
negotiations begin. I wish he would have at least set forward a liberal position.
Just think what may have happened had Obama not given away public option before negotiations began, but perhaps he had started at single payer?
Same thing on stimulus.
Some similar compromises before Wall Street negotiations began.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. The public option passed the House.
It was in the bill Obama introduced. So I don't believe its accurate to say that he gave in on that issue before negotiations began. I don't know but I'm guessing Obama would have been laughed off the stage for introducing a single-player plan that everyone knew had zero chance of passing Congress. Maybe they made the wrong moves but they just succeeded at passing HCR where five previous Presidents failed.

I know some pundits have suggested that Obama didn't even try but I think they're either being lazy or have other agendas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. He consistently made it clear that the PO was negotiable. Just a bargaining chip. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. Obama did not introduce a bill for HCR to the House.
Edited on Mon May-24-10 05:51 PM by laughingliberal
Yes, a PO was in the House bill but it was not from Obama. Not only that, he did not include a PO in his guidelines for the compromise between the House and Senate bill which he put out before the MA Senate election. Obama, from the start, left the legislation in the hands of Congress. Many here who wanted him to introduce a bill for the consideration of the Congress were very disappointed that he did not and the defenders here screamed it was Congress' job and he was letting them do it. We were treated to a scenario about how he was avoiding the 'Clinton mistake' by letting Congress work.

It is not that easy to change the history of HCR. A lot of us paid very close attention.

edited 2 typos
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-10 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #37
51. So the countless TV appearances and two speeches before Congress
where he pushed for a bill that included the public option don't count in your mind? I think you remember things how you want to remember them and believe whatever accusations reaffirm what you'd like to believe about Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-10 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. He did not introduce an HCR bill to Congress
Your statement that he did would indicate you remember things how you want to remember them. This was widely commented on here and in the media and was touted, as I said, as Obama being smart to avoid the "Clinton mistake."

Further, I remember his speeches and remember my heart sinking as every time he spoke of HCR, he downplayed the importance of the PO more. I remember holding out hope in August that he had a clever plan to let the teabaggers make fools of themselves on TV and come in for the kill after the recess. I remeber in September, the public support for a PO was strong despite the teabaggers and believing this was the plan all along-to let public support for the PO grow so he could stand up and demand it from Congress. I remember my fear as I watched him praise the gang of six thugs on Baucus' committee, the only committee involved that was, obviously, not going to have a PO in it and that was going to have an excise tax on comprehensive insurance plans. I remember telling myself he was just doing that so they would finish up their work, get a bill passed out of committee where it would then be blended with the much better HELP committee bill. I remember waiting after the Finance committee passed the bill for him to step up and advocate for the PO. And I remember it being downplayed more and more as time went on. And I remember it was in November that I, slow learner that I am, finally had to admit to myself that he didn't have a great strategy to get the PO in the bill.

I remember my hope when Harry Reid came out with the plan for the Medicare expansion. I remember Joe Lieberman going on Fox on a Sunday morning and saying he would not support the plan. I remember believing Harry and the White House would get to him and persuade him. I remember the very next morning Harry Reid fuming because Rahm Emanuel showed up Sunday night at his office and ordered him to cave in to Joe when I thought he should have been in Joe's office putting the screws to him. I remember feeling like an idiot that even as evidence mounted, at every step, that President Obama just wasn't going to fight for the PO that I was still hoping that was wrong.

I remember when the House and Senate compromise was being worked out with the President's hands on help that I still hoped now was the time he was waiting for to dig in and demand the PO from the Senate. And I remember my shock when his do or die issue became keeping the excise tax and not the PO. I remember after the MA election, when it became obvious we would be going the reconciliation route, believing, even then, that now he would be able to clearly ask for the PO cause I knew we had 50 votes in the Senate for it. I remember that I held out hope he would step up for the PO until the last dog died. And I remember finally having to admit to myself that he never really wanted it.

If him coming out and saying he never campaigned on it wasn't enough to convince people of that and they can still say he worked for the PO then I would have to say they are the ones who remember things the way they want to remember them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Amen !!! - He Gives Away Half The Store Before Even Sitting Down To Negotiate !!!
:shrug:

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. EXACTLY! He gives too much away BEFORE we get to the table.
You got the HCR debate exactly right.

At minimum, Single payer belonged at the table to tilt it left since the insurance companies were there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
okie Donating Member (158 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #23
40. Some people see the New Deal as a 'corporatism'
Edited on Mon May-24-10 06:18 PM by okie
I don't really differentiate between 'corporatism' and capitalism, but in any case, there are a number of good critiques of the New Deal from socialists and the libertarian-right. It boils down to seeing the New Deal as a conservative measure meant to stabilize the system and institutionalize opposition from an increasingly radical labor movement. Here's a pretty good synthesis of the arguments critical of the New Deal (the author apparently took a dramatic right turn later in life, but he does well here).

http://www.marxmail.org/new_deal.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William Z. Foster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
41. lots
There was a strong left wing in those days, and for all of your whining about any criticism of Obama it is nothing today compared to what it was then against FDR. Nothing.

Pressure from the left on FDR is why we had the New Deal.

But you don't care, so carry on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-10 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #41
50. And the left in that time actually organized.
Making non-stop exaggerated criticisms about Obama is not organizing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
36. My, how Democrats have changed
Here and now I want to make myself clear about those who disparage their fellow citizens on the relief rolls. They say that those on relief are not merely jobless--that they are worthless. Their solution for the relief problem is to end relief--to purge the rolls by starvation. To use the language of the stock broker, our needy unemployed would be cared for when, and if, some fairy godmother should happen on the scene.

You and I will continue to refuse to accept that estimate of our unemployed fellow Americans. Your Government is still on the same side of the street with the Good Samaritan and not with those who pass by on the other side.


Right here we, regularly, see the disparaging of those on the relief rolls of which he speaks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. Yeah, Huh ???
It's hysterical that many Democrats now look at FDR as some sort of radical Bolshevik.

Of course many here had their formative years when Reagan was President, so... no surprise.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. and they have been fed by the RW echo chamber
it is really hard to believe how deep into the psyche that RW talking points are drilled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
name not needed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. So anyone born after 1980 isn't a real liberal. Gotcha.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Oh Yeah... That's Exactly What I Said...
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-10 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #42
53. I think the test of that is not when they were born but whether they believe in Reagonomics. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
name not needed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-25-10 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. Well, a belief in Reaganomics is generally a pretty strong sign of stupidity, is it not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #54
55. It is. But I see Reaganomics preached here all the time.
His crap has so invaded the thinking I'm not sure people even know that's where the ideas they advocate originated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
44. I'm so naive that I thought the Democrats would seize the FDR mantle as soon as 2009.
I thought they'd realize millions of us knew how much Bush Cheney misrule had destroyed our country and pushed us into plutocracy again-- privatized us into disaster-- and would have called a Time Out on Modern Republican Values.

Democrats would have zoomed in after the Bush Crash and Bush Bailout and insisted on a people's bailout-- Medicare for All-- because hundreds of thousands were being evicted from their homes and going bankrupt from privatized medical expenses.

It didn't bother me that President Obama was a pragmatist-- my 21st Century Green FDR plan was very practical. Putting millions to work on green jobs would have revived local economies. Freeing millions from medical terror would have secured Democratic popularity. Making giant green strides toward renewable energy would also have helped our national security enormously.

We could even have done the cherished bipartisan thing by noting that Modern Republicans had strayed from the values of their forebears. They once claimed to support economic restraint but Republicans since Reagan had run up huge deficits. They once claimed to support strong national security policies but privatizing the military had made it much weaker and led to the perpetration of blatant war crimes. The Democrats could have talked about that more.

But we pretended they had not been a massive failure. We groveled for a few votes from the poisonous party of private profit.

And here we still are. Pretending. Letting the private sector call the shots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Yep... That Was The Change I Was Believing In...
Silly me...

Great Post!!!

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. That Green FDR Dream is a practical way for the majority of us--
we could even have been making the most of our bankruptcy at the hands of the Bush Gang. With our millions of jobs repairing Modern Republican Values of deferred maintenance in favor of private profit, with that clear time out and renewal plan, we could have been bankrupt but with modest paychecks repairing our country together, trying new ways to conserve energy together, sharing the ingenious tests that various places are running on our evening news-- if it had not been so heavily privatized into multinational oligarchical hands.

With national health security as a foundation, we the people could have been asked to join in repairing our country. But we did need that teach-in, to acknowledge the mistakes we all felt the Bush Gang had made, as a starting point-- to share the hope of trying something new in the interest of increasing our longevity, and conserving the resources we hope to continue using for thousands of years.

We were robbed, as a nation, but we could rebuild together and that could be wonderfully democratic.

Gotta dash off to dance class. Low key fun in the neighborhood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. Kind of awkwardly stated, but we could have been facing the gushing disaster
from a whole different perspective right now.

Had our democrats zoomed in democratically, serving the majority of us-- we'd have approached offshore drilling much more tentatively already-- we can always drill-- later. Right now we democrats want to decentralize and democratize our power sources. We want to give solar and wind and conservation technologies and mass transit the massive investment they have always deserved.

Democratic, decentralized power-- a lot of it obtained through conservation retrofitting projects that put millions of us to work.

And when BP and their teams screwed up through short-cutting on safety technology, they would be liable for the whole shebang of whatever our government needed to do to protect our national interest and our precious ecosystems.

We would be experiencing a renewed dedication to furthering our solar, wind, conservation and mass transit projects all across the country. We would be utilizing expertise from around the globe in confronting the reckless energy giant that took those reckless shortcuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
46. Yes He Does... His Legacy Frightens Right Wingers
maybe because the man is still admired, and not hated as much as the right wing propaganda machine would want people to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fadedrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-24-10 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
47. I remember my immigrant parents..
me on the floor playing, and them listening to FDR on the radio like he was Moses himself, saying, "shh, shh, shh" whenever I tried to speak. I learned to love him from them.

Thank you for posting about FDR..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-26-10 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
57. Bookmarked
and highly recommended.


:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC