The fifth head on Rushmore

[dcnativenerd]

A thread in the Stadium had me thinking:
"If you could put a fifth face on Rushmore, who would it be?"

If we're going to continue with presidents, I think I'd go with FDR. No one's served as long and he's, argueably had the most impact on this country as president.

What say you?

[Cdowwe]

James Polk.... All the Presidents on the Mount expanded our country so I think he should be included

[SnyderShrugged]

A thread in the Stadium had me thinking:
"If you could put a fifth face on Rushmore, who would it be?"

If we're going to continue with presidents, I think I'd go with FDR. No one's served as long and he's, argueably had the most impact on this country as president.

What say you?


Definitely not FDR!

Even though he wasnt a President, I'd like Sam Adams up there,

[DarrellsMyHero28]

RON PAUL

FTW!

:doh:

[dcnativenerd]

Why the Ron Paul hate, man?

[ECU-ALUM]

Eisenhower...not only for what he did as President but his contributions as a leader of the Allied forces in WW2.

[DeanCollins]

http://images.townnews.com/nctimes.com/content/articles/2007/06/04/backpage/6_3_0716_28_39.jpg




http://www.celebography.com/Pics/Thumbs/LarryFlynt.jpg...............

[dcnativenerd]

Eisenhower...not only for what he did as President but his contributions as a leader of the Allied forces in WW2.
Good idea. Eisenhower was a fine general during the war and certainly one of our more under rated Presidents


http://www.celebography.com/Pics/Thumbs/LarryFlynt.jpg...............
So...should I put you down for FDR, too?

[JohnLockesGhost]

Not a fan of Mount Rushmore. Too much like idol worship.

[BigMike619]

I like where you're going with that Dean!!


But I would have to say I would like to see my own face up there...

[DeanCollins]

Good idea. Eisenhower was a fine general during the war and certainly one of our more under rated Presidents


So...should I put you down for FDR, too?

lol, no. edited, I'll be glad when I get my mac hooked up (just moved) wife's PC sux :silly:

[BigMike619]

Not a fan of Mount Rushmore. Too much like idol worship.

I get that...

But I dont think anyone is bowing to it or offering sacrifices to it.

But I do see your point. :2cents:

[dcnativenerd]

I've never seen it as idol worship, personally. Just a homage to great men who served their country.

[SKINS@THEGOALLINE]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b299/SKINS7/bush_rushmore_buzzflash.jpg
How about these guys? :laugh:

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

Anyone else think of National Treasure 2 when opening this?

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Why the Ron Paul hate, man?

No hate, just jokes

[ArmchairRedskin]

Al Gore cause he invented the internets.

[dcnativenerd]

No hate, just jokes
Ah, it's all good. :D

[revallenjr]

Ronald Reagan

[ACW]

Millard Fillmore. Why? What's he famous for? Nothing. My point exactly. The best Presidents (for the most part; GW's also one of the best) IMO are the little-known ones.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Millard Fillmore. Why? What's he famous for? Nothing. My point exactly. The best Presidents (for the most part; GW's also one of the best) IMO are the little-known ones.

Exactly. I love me some Grover Cleveland. :)

[Burgold]

Going a different way, how about Thomas Edison. I think he embodies something pretty cool about America. Inventiveness, coming from nothing, hard work, etc.

Or what's more important to America than ...

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/4155/misspiggy.jpg

or

http://schirmer-mosel.germanartbooks.de/images/Monroe_Kamera_9783829603119_550.jpg

[Tastes Like Chicken]

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/hulk.jpgA Riggity Real American, brother!

[SUSkinsFan]

I would propose this American

http://tmgcanada.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/steve-jobs.jpg

[SUSkinsFan]

Think we could start a petition to get this added?
http://homersontherange.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/romo-wildcard1.jpg

[zoony]

The criteria for the original faces:


presidents were selected by Borglum because of their role in preserving the Republic and expanding its territory [over the first 150 years of our Nation's history]

Therefore you'd almost have to say FDR or Woodrow Wilson. Maybe Eisenhower.

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

http://www.mmbolding.com/BSR/pq70jurgensen.jpg

[Raub]

FDR did so much for the country that I don't think there's even a close second.

[Dictator]

The criteria for the original faces:



Therefore you'd almost have to say FDR or Woodrow Wilson. Maybe Eisenhower.

Or, as was mentioned earlier, Polk.

[DeanCollins]

http://www.ceosmack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/hughhefner.jpg..............
this guy knows more about head then the next hundred of you :silly:

[Thiebear]

Thomas Jefferson or Edison.
Both created this country.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Obama. And it's not even close. He's so amazing, he will absolutely have to be included in the conversation.

[Hubbs]

Thomas Jefferson

Um.... :secret:

[Thiebear]

Um.... :secret:
Dang your right.
i'll go with Abraham Lincoln

[IHOPSkins]

Preserving the Republic......
http://teamassignment.com/images/ReaganRushmore.gif

[dcnativenerd]

http://www.mmbolding.com/BSR/pq70jurgensen.jpg
Nevermind. We've got a winner.

[HogNose]

A thread in the Stadium had me thinking:
"If you could put a fifth face on Rushmore, who would it be?"



http://www.leconcombre.com/concpost/us/postcard4/alfred_e_neuman.jpg

[Buford]

Too easy

http://writeontheinternet.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/superman.jpg

[zoony]

Or, as was mentioned earlier, Polk.


if they wanted Polk they would have chosen him originally

[SC_RedskinsFan]

http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/Previews/Dale-Earnhardt-c01.jpg (http://www.starpulse.com/Athletes/Earnhardt,_Dale/gallery/Dale-Earnhardt-c02/)


Dale Earnhardt

[Larry]

Never understood the Earnhart worship.

Granted, I really couldn't care less, but I was under the impression that King Richard did a lot more to create that sport than he did.

[SC_RedskinsFan]

Never understood the Earnhart worship.

Granted, I really couldn't care less, but I was under the impression that King Richard did a lot more to create that sport than he did.


Dale Sr took NASCAR to the next level. Great driver and a blue collar guy. And you spell it Earnhardt Larry.:)

[IHOPSkins]

.... And you spell it Earnhardt Larry.:)Yeah
Lari

[Riggo-toni]

Alexander Hamilton.
He may not have held the office of President, but he was the most brilliant and effective of all our founding fathers, and is perhaps most responsible for the economic powerhouse our nation became.

[SonOfWashington]

Mark Brunell.

[ACW]

Alexander Hamilton.
He may not have held the office of President, but he was the most brilliant and effective of all our founding fathers, and is perhaps most responsible for the economic powerhouse our nation became.Riggo, you're a libertarian, right? Hamilton? :no:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo136.html

[Hubbs]

Actually, I'd be interested in seeing Ben Franklin up there. Not a President, but as instrumental in creating and saving the birth pangs of this country as any other man.

[PokerPacker]

Alexander Hamilton.
He may not have held the office of President, but he was the most brilliant and effective of all our founding fathers, and is perhaps most responsible for the economic powerhouse our nation became.
if we're straying from presidents, how about George Mason? He contributed the Bill of Rights.

[PokerPacker]

Actually, I'd be interested in seeing Ben Franklin up there. Not a President, but as instrumental in creating and saving the birth pangs of this country as any other man.
another one I wouldn't mind being up there.

[JMS]

James Polk.... All the Presidents on the Mount expanded our country so I think he should be included


Washington and Lincoln arguable purserved the country and did not expand it. FDR arguable overcame two of the greatest threats to this country since the war of independence. The Great Depression and WWII. He is the only president who can be mentioned in the same breath with Washington, Lincoln, and TR; who is not already on Rushmore. Jefferson had a very good first term in office, but his second term wasn't so hot.....

I'd have to go with FDR... which would put four liberals up on the wall with Washington..... Reagan was the greatest modern president, I put him as a great president, but not among our greatest ever... ( FDR, TR, Lincoln, and Washington )..

[JMS]

Alexander Hamilton.
He may not have held the office of President, but he was the most brilliant and effective of all our founding fathers, and is perhaps most responsible for the economic powerhouse our nation became.


The problem with Alexander Hamilton is he tried to raise and army and overthrow the Presidency. He also advocated a lifetime monarchy rather than 4 year Presidency. His claim to fame was he was the trusted right hand of Washington. Probme was after Washington died he kind of went insane with lust for power.

Not to mention he was shot dead because he accused Jefferson's vice President Aron Burr of sleeping with his own daughter...... Think we'll leave hamilton off Rushmore thank you very much.

[PokerPacker]

Not to mention he was shot dead because he accused Jefferson's vice President Aron Burr of sleeping with his own daughter...... Think we'll leave hamilton off Rushmore thank you very much.
to be fair, he was shot dead because he missed.

[DGreenistheBest]

FDR would be my vote simply because he brought us through WW2 in one piece.

[Rocky21]

Barbara Bush.

[MDRedskinsFan]

If we're going to talk about the criteria for Mt. Rushmore being that the person helped expand the US, then GWB has to be considered. I mean, don't we now control Iraq?:silly:

[Zguy28]

William Shatner.

[IHOPSkins]

FDR would be my vote simply because he brought us through WW2 in one piece.The Arsenal of Democracy brought us through

FDR sold out eastern europe

[DGreenistheBest]

The Arsenal of Democracy brought us through

FDR sold out eastern europe

What do you mean he sold out eastern europe? He was dead before the war was over.

[JohnLockesGhost]

What do you mean he sold out eastern europe? He was dead before the war was over.

He means at the Yalta Conference where FDR was under the considerable influence of later exposed communist, Alger Hiss.

[JohnLockesGhost]

The thing that always get me about FDR is that he is a total accident. He wasn't a deep thinker, probably of moderate intellect. He rose to prominence mostly through his relation to an ex-President, his love of political pomp, family wealth and good looks. He was a quintessential "politician" in that he'd never fully commit to a program. The New Deal was hodgepodge of ideas to resurrect the wartime management of the economy present during the Wilson administration of WWI.

Was he an effective wartime leader? Sure.

But I really don't find him to be a great advocate for liberty,which is how I define greatness.

[DGreenistheBest]

The thing that always get me about FDR is that he is a total accident. He wasn't a deep thinker, probably of moderate intellect. He rose to prominence mostly through his relation to an ex-President, his love of political pomp, family wealth and good looks. He was a quintessential "politician" in that he'd never fully commit to a program. The New Deal was hodgepodge of ideas to resurrect the wartime management of the economy present during the Wilson administration of WWI.

Was he an effective wartime leader? Sure.

But I really don't find him to be a great advocate for liberty,which is how I define greatness.

They apparently thought differently of him at the time.

[Ellis]

Eisenhower...not only for what he did as President but his contributions as a leader of the Allied forces in WW2.

Agreed.
I was going to say him as well.
Or John Adams.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I think Clinton's wang and his cigar should be on there for going where no man dared to go before.

[JohnLockesGhost]

They apparently thought differently of him at the time.

Who's they?

A lot of people felt FDR's actions were terrible. His court-packing scheme. The National Industrial Recovery Act was a quasi-fascist economic catastrophe (not to mention a gross violation of the US Constitution).

He had many critics, but people re-elected because he was "doing something." And FDR was good at finding bogeymen to blame: price gougers, brokers, unscrupulous lenders, gold hoarders, etc.

[CallMeGreen]

The Thing. He's already made of stone so it should be pretty easy.
http://www.brainstormcomics.com/thing,jpg.jpg

[JMS]

to be fair, he was shot dead because he missed.

To be fair, Hamilton hated Arron Burr's guts. They were both polititians from New York. Hamilton so hated Burr, that he engineered his phylisophical antithesis's in Jefferson's election to the Presidency if it meant Burr was barred from that office.

(*) Burr became VP because he like Adams before him was the runner up in the Presidential election of 1800. Arron Burr actually tied Thomas Jefferson for the lead in electorial college votes with 73 electorial college votes between them in 1800. Jefferson won when the vote went to the house of representatives when a state by state run-off was executed. Jefferson made a deal with Hamilton where Hamilton would become the Secretary of the Treasurer in exchange for his support against Burr in the run off.

Arron Burr latter was confined and tried for treason by Jefferson in his second term in office 1806-1807 because Burr tried to establish his own country in the south west of the United States in what is now Texas. He ended up recruiting some of the wrong men who testified against him. Burr was found innocent because of a lack of evidence, but the trial destroyed what was left of his political career after having murdered Hamilton in 1804, and 20th century historians have no doubt the charges of treason against Burr were accurate...

Anyway.... Arron Burr lived with his daughter in New York in 1804 as VP of the United States. His daughter was a very attractive young lady. He did escort her to political and social functions. And Alexander hamilton the sitting Secretary of the Treasury did charge Burr the sitting Vice President with sleeping with her in the New York Newspapers. (No evidence of this being the case).... Burr challenged Hamilton to a duel, which Hamilton a revolutionary war hero who was decorated by Washington for bravery in several battles was heavily favored. Hamilton didn't miss his first shot, Hamilton accepted the duel and discharged his weapon into the air. He expected Burr to do the chilverous thing and likewise shoot into the air. Thus both men's honor would be satisfied. Arron Burr instead shot Hamilton dead, effectively ending Burr's hopes for the higher office of President.

Oddly enough under Adams, the second President of the United States, it was Alexander Hamilton who wrote letters advocating the military overthrow of the governemnt. It was Hamilton who tried to raise an army essentially for homeland security with the secrete goal of displacing the Republic.

[Rocky21]

Who's they?I guess "they" are the majority of U.S. citizens that elected him to lead our country for 4 consecutive terms.

What's with all the FDR bashing? Some sort of contrarian logic?

[DGreenistheBest]

Who's they?

A lot of people felt FDR's actions were terrible. His court-packing scheme. The National Industrial Recovery Act was a quasi-fascist economic catastrophe (not to mention a gross violation of the US Constitution).

He had many critics, but people re-elected because he was "doing something." And FDR was good at finding bogeymen to blame: price gougers, brokers, unscrupulous lenders, gold hoarders, etc.

Not only would your opinion have been unpopular back then, I think its fairly unpopular now. The only person I've known to say FDR was a bad President is Ann Coulter. And well...it's Ann Coulter.

[JohnLockesGhost]

I guess "they" are the majority of U.S. citizens that elected him to lead our country for 4 consecutive terms.

What's with all the FDR bashing? Some sort of contrarian logic?

Majorities often do stupid things (e.g. re-elect George W. Bush).

I'm not really bashing him, just pointing out some historical facts. The dude was no philosopher king. He was famous for just going where the winds blew. People elected him four times because he was an able politician who knew who were the politically acceptable people to blame.

I'd also like to point out that that your last two questions to speak to my larger point about idols. Details about a historical event or person can only stay in the popular conscience/conversation for so long. Eventually those details fade and devolve into a shorthand version of history or a convention. These conventions are often wrong or at least terribly simplistic. We, as a people, shouldn't literally carve this convention into stone by making idols out of very complicated men. There's plenty of room for debate about these men, who they were and how they governed. And I believe by literally turning them into monuments our ability to discuss them takes a sharp nosedive.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Not only would your opinion have been unpopular back then, I think its fairly unpopular now. The only person I've known to say FDR was a bad President is Ann Coulter. And well...it's Ann Coulter.

Popularity has never really been a concern of mine when studying history.

And I've really never said he was a bad president, just a complicated one who did many, MANY debatable things.

[Busch1724]

FDR has led to the decline of our individualism and our dependance on the government. While welfare and social security might seem like nice ideas, they were what led us to where we are now...a society asking for the government to bail them out at any chance we can. It opened the door for so many government programs that we can't pay for.

One question though...who's idea was it to implement property taxes? I seriously can't remember who that was.

[JMS]

Not only would your opinion have been unpopular back then, I think its fairly unpopular now. The only person I've known to say FDR was a bad President is Ann Coulter. And well...it's Ann Coulter.


And of coarse JohnLocksGhost's claim that some of FDR's policies were unpopular in his day is correct. When the Supreme court threatened to recind some of the new deal FDR did threaten to pack the court with his supporters which was very very unpopular.....

His claim that FDR himself or the majority of his policies were unpopular is absolute bunk. The fact is the Great Depression occured early in Hoover's first term in office Oct 29th 1929. Hoover's policies of money tightenning and restricting trade deapenned and prolonged the Depression. When FDR got into office his first 100 days is seen as the most productive time of any administration. In FDR's first year in office 1933 he turned around growing Unemployment, shrinking GDP, and shrinking industrial production. In FDR's second year of his first term he reduced bank failures from more than 2000 to fewer than 20. FDR also turned about farm forclosures in his second year in office....

There is a revisionist history going around which claims to discredit hero's of the left and recycle discredited leaders on the right.. like Joe McCarthy. It is revisionist history and anybody who cars to review the statistics can easily pierce the vail of that ideology.

FDR's policies were wildly sucessful, and a night a day difference from Hoover.

[zoony]

FDR has led to the decline of our individualism and our dependance on the government. While welfare and social security might seem like nice ideas, they were what led us to where we are now...a society asking for the government to bail them out at any chance we can. It opened the door for so many government programs that we can't pay for.

One question though...who's idea was it to implement property taxes? I seriously can't remember who that was.


IIRC, it was Thomas Jefferson's idea that landowners should be taxed. Could be wrong on that though, I probably am :D

As for the rest of your post, I think the main culprit there was Lyndon Johnson, whose Great Society created a permanent under-class in this country.

[Predicto]

Bullcrap revisionist history is all the rage these days, especially when it comes to liberal icons like FDR. The guy held this country together through the greatest economic catastrophy in our history and the most terrible war ever fought. To not give him his due is utterly absurd.

[Rocky21]

I'd say Ronald Reagan for the 5th head. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I get it. That's a good one.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Bullcrap revisionist history is all the rage these days, especially when it comes to liberal icons like FDR. The guy held this country together through the greatest economic catastrophy in our history and the most terrible war ever fought. To not give him his due is utterly absurd.

And any criticism is blasphemy.

Thanks for the demonstrating the larger point.

[JMS]

FDR has led to the decline of our individualism and our dependance on the government.


:doh: actually FDR's policies didn't lead to a "dependance on the government". Actually FDR put the government to work for the people. Social security for example is credited with raising 80% of senior citizens above the poverty line in the early 1930's.


today half of all senior citizens would live bellow the poverty line without social security benifit.
FDR's social security today does more to lift children out of poverty than any other government program.
For 2/3rds of elderly social security provides more than half their income, for half of all elderly social security provides all of their income.
Social security is an extreamly efficient system with operating costs of .6% of retirement benifits. Compare that to many commercial insurance companies who have 30% profits and 10% operating costs..
FDR's systems remain wildly popular and wildly successful. As bush found out when he tried to privatize Social Security two years ago.

http://www.cbpp.org/8-11-05socsec.htm


[/quote]
One question though...who's idea was it to implement property taxes? I seriously can't remember who that was.[/QUOTE]

Property taxes have always been with us. It's income tax which was a relitively new thing. I believe that was FDR back in the early 1930's.

[Predicto]

And any criticism is blasphemy.

Thanks for the demonstrating the larger point.


I didn't say any criticism is blasphemy.

I said bullcrap revisionist criticism is blasphemy.

There are plenty of things to criticize FDR (or any president) about. No one is perfect.

What is foolish is to take a handful of relatively minor criticisms and use them to obscure the larger picture of what a president accomplished, overall, in the context of his times.

Like some people (including you) did earlier in this thread.

[JMS]

And any criticism is blasphemy.

Thanks for the demonstrating the larger point.


Any criticism which isn't based on reality is propaganda. A few of FDR's idea's got him in trouble and hurt his popularity. Over all FDR was wildly sucessful, and remains one of our most popular, influencial and accomplished presidents.

He alone among modern post WWI presidents is in the company of the Greatest Presidents, all of whom other than Washington were self described liberals.

[Busch1724]

:doh: actually FDR's policies didn't lead to a "dependance on the government". Actually FDR put the government to work for the people. Social security for example is credited with raising 80% of senior citizens above the poverty line in the early 1930's.


today half of all senior citizens would live bellow the poverty line without social security benifit.
FDR's social security today does more to live children out of poverty than any other government program.
For 2/3rds of elderly social security provides more than half their income, for half of all elderly social security provides all of their income.
Social security is an extreamly efficient system with operating costs of .6% of retirement benifits. Compare that to many commercial insurance companies who have 30% profits and 10% operating costs..

FDR's systems remain wildly popular and wildly successful. As bush found out when he tried to privatize Social Security two years ago.

http://www.cbpp.org/8-11-05socsec.htm



One question though...who's idea was it to implement property taxes? I seriously can't remember who that was.[/QUOTE]

Property taxes have always been with us. It's income tax which was a relitively new thing. I believe that was FDR back in the early 1930's.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the info. However, it's nice that senior citizens have something to fall back on. The seniors should have saved during the Roaring 20s, but didn't. Many of the things that have happened these last few decades are many of the things that happened early in the last century. The same thing is going to happen. How in the world will we pay for it? We can't this time because we did it the last time. The only difference is this time it's illegal workers and credit card companies. The last time it was rampant unemployment and wreckless banking.

With that said, especially with baby boomers coming up, how many people properly plan for retirement? My parents haven't and will depend on S.S. to bail them out. S.S. isn't the only reason we've become less individualistic, but it's certainly something people point back to when providing an example of how goverment can do something for the populace. It led to the implementation of the Great Society, which created more programs like Medicaid and Medicare that we don't have money for.

Unfortunately we have a two party system that is corrupt, we won't be able to fix it. The next few years will be interesting to see waht kind of ideas get implemented...good and bad.

[JohnLockesGhost]

I didn't say any criticism is blasphemy.

I said bullcrap revisionist criticism is blasphemy.

There are plenty of things to criticize FDR (or any president) about. No one is perfect.

What is foolish is to take a handful of relatively minor criticisms and use them to obscure the larger picture of what a president accomplished, overall, in the context of his times.

Like some people (including you) did earlier in this thread.
Ok, I just reread my posts. And really don't really see why you two are so riled up. My points were...

FDR was a historical accident stemming from his name, his face, his money and his ambition.
FDR was no philosopher, but was an able politician who was able to sense the prevailing winds.
FDR's presidency was a complicated one with many issues and programs that were struck down, some that were inefficatious and counterproductive.
FDR certainly wasn't a bad president, but we shouldn't deify him (or ANY president).
You may disagree with my points, that's fine. Hell, that's more than fine.

I think his personality and ability to communicate were his greatest assets, sort of like Churchill (Churchill was a terrible student), and were very instrumental in what you describe as "holding the country together."

My larger point, and how it relates to the thread, is that "icons" as you say, are dangerous to a free country. Love of these icons, idols and personalities have the power to replace our love for the IDEAS that the country was founded upon.

Can we find any kind of common ground on that?

[JMS]

I'm not really bashing him, just pointing out some historical facts. The dude was no philosopher king. He was famous for just going where the winds blew. People elected him four times because he was an able politician who knew who were the politically acceptable people to blame.


There is a half trueth in that. Roosevelt is famous for appointing deputies who disagreeed philosophically with their chairmen. He then sat back and listenned to them argue their cases. Roosevelt didn't come into many problems with philosophical beliefs but created friction between leaders in his administration to discover it.... It is also a testiment to FDR's political abilities that after such knock down drag out policy brawls it wasn't uncommon for both men to believe FDR was on their side.

Compare that to how Bush decides an issue by looking into a man's soul, or un philosophical reasons before hearing the facts and I can see how one might confuse actively working out a solution indepenent of political idealolgy as FDR did with being "blown" in the wind.

Take the Great Depression for example. He stood up to big business across the board on labor. He set limits on wages they could not go under even though desparate workers would work for those reduced wages. He also set price controls and taxed businesses at a higher rate than they were being taxed at under previous administrations. FDR spent the majority of the first two terms in office making enemies of the industrialists.... But when WWII broke out he turned around 100% and put industrialists in charge of war production. He didn't let them dismantle all of the new deal as they wished, but he gave them great power and trust to control their own productivity. Was this blowing in the wind? Or was it a new solution to a new problem?

Rather than calling that blowing in the wind... I would call that steering a coarse through the wind, adjusting to it as your goals change.




There's plenty of room for debate about these men, who they were and how they governed. And I believe by literally turning them into monuments our ability to discuss them takes a sharp nosedive.

There actually isn't much room to discredit FDR. The wave of popularity and appreciation for what he accomplish insulated him from critism on the right or left while people who knew him lived. After all FDR dominated government for more than 12 years and presided over not only a resergents in Democratic party but a discrediting and destruction of the Republican parties ideas. The republican party which emerged to compete with FDR was a shaddow of the democratic party itself rather than a reflection of Hoover's isolationism and out of date thinking. Alf Landon(r) 1936, Wendel Wilkie(r) 1940, and Thomas Dewey(r) 1944 every one was a liberal... Wendel Wilkie(r) who challenged Roosevelt for the Presidency in 1940, was as liberal or more liberal than Roosvelt himself... Roosevelt actually appointed him special ambassidor after the election the men shared so much political philosophy.

Even Eisenhower who was the next Republican candidate was more influenced by Roosevelt's global and economic philosophies than previous Republican administrations. Remember the Republicans were isolationists, protectionists before FDR. Eisenhower rather than resuming isolationist policies which have governed US foreign policy since Washington's fairwell address ( with notable exceptions)... Eisenhower kept the United States anchored in globalism.

FDR not only changed the Democratic party he changed the Republican party. Becoming more like FDR was their only hope of competing with him, something they never were effective in doing during his lifetime.

[Predicto]

Ok, I just reread my posts. And really don't really see why you two are so riled up. My points were...

FDR was a historical accident stemming from his name, his face, his money and his ambition.
FDR was no philosopher, but was an able politician who was able to sense the prevailing winds.
FDR's presidency was a complicated one with many issues and programs that were struck down, some that were inefficatious and counterproductive.
FDR certainly wasn't a bad president, but we shouldn't deify him (or ANY president).
You may disagree with my points, that's fine. Hell, that's more than fine.



1. Not really relevant. The majority of Presidents could be viewed as an "accident" under this standard.
2. Jefferson may be the only president who was also a philosopher.
3. Yes, many of his programs were struck down (some quite incorrectly by a politically biased Supreme Court which later reversed itself).
4. Agreed. We should never deify a president.




I think his personality and ability to communicate were his greatest assets, sort of like Churchill (Churchill was a terrible student), and were very instrumental in what you describe as "holding the country together."



And this is huge in times of war or national catastrophe. There is a reason that the US never really flirted with extremist ideas like fascism or communism during the Depression, when other countries around the world did. The biggest reason was that FDR's policies and leadership gave assurance to the average working American that such extreme solutions were not needed because we were going to pull through it. Likeiwise, FDR's leadership during the war was enormous. Words do matter, leadership does matter.




My larger point, and how it relates to the thread, is that "icons" as you say, are dangerous to a free country. Love of these icons, idols and personalities have the power to replace our love for the IDEAS that the country was founded upon.

Can we find any kind of common ground on that?

Absolutely. Agree 100%.

I will just add that I am a student of history, expecially WWII. I think I jst got peeved because some of the recent scholarship on FDR has been disgracefully biased and inaccurate, and done with such an obvious political agenda.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Also, I think, I'm right in saying the rise of presidents on our coinage is a relatively new phenomenon.

Before the Lincoln penny came into being in 1909, I think, it was an indian head. The nickel had a buffalo on it and the dime, Mercury, a Roman god. The dollar was a personification of Liberty.

There were no Lincolns, Washingtons, Jeffersons, Roosevelts and Kennedys on our coins until the 20th century. I find that curious.

[dcnativenerd]

Though many of the systems that, I believe, are hurting America were kick started by the FDR Administration; I don't believe that was his intention at all. In the 1930's, we were still living in a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" America. They were meant to be temporary solutions until citizens could get their feet beneath them again. FDR may not have been a genius, but he knew how to surround himself with the right people and he knew how to keep this Country from totally going under. For that, at least, he should be commended.

[JMS]

1. FDR was a historical accident stemming from his name, his face, his money and his ambition.


FDR did benifit greatly from the Roosevelt name, and while this historical accident might have defined him early in his political career he did achieve a sufficiently impressive resume to merrit his political sucess.

I don't think many folks would define Rooselvelt after his first Presidential victory as a accident or over matched by his office...... Roosevelt might have been giving his first political appointment as undersecretary of the navy because of the Roosevelt name, he might even have been assisted in his bid for Govenor of New York because of Teddy's popularity with the electorate; But nobody would claim FDR(D) was elected President four times because of TR(R) who only won a single election to the Presidency. Nobody would confuse the political machine FDR built in the democratic party as based on TR's popularity and not FDR's political accomplishments and abilities.



2. FDR was no philosopher, but was an able politician who was able to sense the prevailing winds.


FDR did not have simplistic dogmatic philosohical solutions to every problem which he faced. He relied on educated men with differing opinions to convince him of the best coarse of action. Far from being a questionable trait this is seen as one of the things which made FDR the most sucessful accomplished modern president in history.

I think every president could benifit from a little reliance on reason rather than dogma, as well as a propensity to hearing both sides of an argument.


3. FDR's presidency was a complicated one with many issues and programs that were struck down, some that were inefficatious and counterproductive.


FDR made mistakes especially early in office. Like when he suggested that he would pack the supreme court with his supporters. But FDR's mistakes did not define any of his four terms in office. FDR remains a wildly successful and popular president irregardless of having made a few mistakes. When judged against his accomplishments his mistakes are not even worth mentioniing.

FDR's administration is actually noteworthy with how few gaffs and political mistakes were made.


4. FDR certainly wasn't a bad president, but we shouldn't deify him (or ANY president).


We shouldn't deify any president, but we should acknowledge greatness when it's found either on the left in Jefferson, Lincoln, TR, FDR and Truman; or on the Right as in Reagan. We should judge our leaders and weigh them in order to inform us on future decisions. When judged FDR is among the greatest american leaders.... Above Truman and Reagan who themselves were great leaders.




I think his personality and ability to communicate were his greatest assets, sort of like Churchill (Churchill was a terrible student), and were very instrumental in what you describe as "holding the country together."


FDR did in deed have political gifts as you say. I would say FDR's greatest asset in achieving greateness is that his solutions worked, is that regardless of the controversy FDR most often picked the correct solution. His political gifts simple allowed him the ability to implement policy. FDR is great because his policies worked, and many continue to work today.

FDR is great because he took over a country on the brink of collapse and lead it to become a global super power while increasing the wealth and prosperity of not only the titins of industry, but also the common man.



My larger point, and how it relates to the thread, is that "icons" as you say, are dangerous to a free country. Love of these icons, idols and personalities have the power to replace our love for the IDEAS that the country was founded upon.

Can we find any kind of common ground on that?


I would agree that faith based reasoning is bad. I would agree that dogmatism is bad. I woulnd't vote for a liberal because FDR, TR, Lincoln, Jefferson and Truman were all great presidents; any more than I would vote against one because I thought Reagan was our best President since Truman.

That shouldn't stop me from appreciating the accomplishments of the men after they have left office.

[harrycrumbs]

:logo: Sitting Bull :logo:

[zoony]

Actually, Crazy Horse is already being added to the Black Hills, just down from Mt. Rushmore.

Here is a picture with the progress they've made so far. Not a whole lot. (look in the background, that is the actual monument. In the foreground is just a model) And they've been working on it since 1940 something. No estimated completion date

http://www.sogonow.com/archives/crazy%20horse.jpg

edit-here's another
http://www.unitednativeamerica.com/tribal/crazyhorse.jpg

[Rocky21]

That Crazy Horse monument will never be finished.

[Predicto]

That Crazy Horse monument will never be finished.


Isn't it something like 10 times as big as Mount Rushmore?

[DaveMason]

I know he's not a president, but I think it should be the kid who played Max Fisher in the movie Rushmore.

[JohnLockesGhost]

That Crazy Horse monument will never be finished.

The people building it have turned down government money on multiple occasions.