Dems Were Disgusted at FDR's Attempt to Become Dictator via the Supreme Court?

Question

The Supreme Court UNANIMOUSLY kicked Roosevelt in the teeth by saying that Roosevelt's National Recovery Act was unconstitutional. (Yes, Dems, it's hard to believe that a Dem would hate American law that much and have to get heavily reprimanded by the Supreme Court).

What did Roosevelt do that disgusted Americans? He tried to abolish those justices' authority. How? He tried to expand the number of justices by adding one new justice (of HIS own choice) for each justice who was over 70 years old.)

This sicked many Americans. His own party avoided the issue like the plague.

Why do today's Dems ignore DISGUSTING facts about their own leaders? Dems prefer to live in Fantasyland and call a leader "great" while ignoring his failures. Yet, they will endlessly deride someone not in their own party.

This wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for Dems living in a Fantasyland when they look at the past of their own party.

If Dems never mention FDR as being "great", then their is nothing to talk about. Otherwise, they need to be honest with themselves. And, they should not condem others unless they promise to never do anything disgusting themselves.

Dems, Don't moan about the other party unless you realize that your own party does disgust its members at times too.

Answer 1

The Democrats are merely the other party of the ruling elite and Roosevelt served that function well.

Never the less, the Supreme Court is anything but a bastion of democracy. Their role has almost exclusively been that of protecting the interests of the wealthy elite over the concerns of the population. As any opponent of democratic forms of government is aware, it is hard to enforce your demands upon the majority when there are a lot of members of that majority. This is the reason that the right-wing (wealthy elite), behind Bush and the gang, peruse an all-powerful executive who overrules congress and all others. That is the only way that the interests of the wealthy elite minority can win battles against the working class majority. Therefore, the smaller the Supreme Court, the more effective it can be in protecting the interests of the wealthy elite.

Answer 2

What was that, like 60 years ago. Who gives a flying flip about what a democratic president tried to do in the 1940's. Seriously, is that your best argument against democrats, that Franklin freaking Roosevelt tried to change the way the Supreme Court was set up? Get a grip. FDR has never been my leader.

So your argument is that a leader cannot be considered great if he ever did anything that could be considered wrong, or a failure. In that case, we have never had a great leader, period. This includes the Republican's favorite president, Ronald Reagan. Remember that little Iran-Contra thing. Yeah, I think that could be considered something that was terribly wrong. While what FDR did may have sickened Americans, what Reagan did killed Americans.

Answer 3

This is relevant actually. A big complaint of Dems currently is that too much power is being put into the hands of the Executive branch. The first pres. to really do that though was FDR, who is currently being hailed as a hero and is somehow seen as a nearly perfect president.
When he did this, he already controlled Congress to a level Bush would envy (if he knew history that is). FDR set the precedent for the President to hold more than his intended 1/3 of power, and laid the way for further expansions of that power.

However, you cant condemn current Dems for these actions, merely for the hypocrisy of hating Bush but loving FDR for the same thing merely because the people benefitting changed.

Answer 4

What is this, " I hate FDR Day "? Oh, wait, its " I hate Democrats " . Hmmmmm. Where have I read this before ?
In reading the history of that era, I am far more appalled at Americans like Bush's grandfather who made and laundered money for the Nazis until 1942.
Republicans like Sen. Wheeler, Labor Leaders like John L Lewis, , Industrialists like the CEO of Texaco, I.T.T, Standard Oil, and public figures such as Charles Lindbergh supported staying out of the war and spoke publicly in favor of the Nazis even after they took most of Europe. Many of these folks were Republicans, affluent and conservative.

Answer 5

FDR did a lot of good things some of them great.

All presidents make mistakes and he was no different.

Times change and so do politics, we could go back and tear down the founding fathers for being slave owners, but it would serve no purpose.

America has the ability to change for the better and a lot of progress, both socially and politically, has been made since FDR was president . We can't go back and chastise political parties for what happened 50 or even 25 years ago.

Answer 6

Do you really truly believe that your arguement about a US President who died 60 years ago is valid today?

Nixon was a complete and absolute crook - but arguing about it to make the Democrats look better would be completely irrelevent.

Why? History has long since moved on and more to the point BOTH OF THEM ARE LONG DEAD.

Answer 7

regrettably, the Democrats did no longer positioned up adequate of a combat. There are few factors of yankee life that are unaffected with the help of the concepts of the superb court docket. with a bit of luck the top of the importance of their new positions will help the hot justices exchange into extra enlightened and wiser than their previous information point out that they are.

Answer 8

Take a break, After that tirad of propaganda you must be tired.

Answer 9

Your interpretation of history is fascinating.