A Drop the MuthaFuckin' Mic Moment. When Presidents Were Grown Folk

[AthenaAwakened]

If only our leaders today had big brass ones like the man in the wheelchair.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT LETTER TO THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION

July 18, 1940

Members of the Convention:

In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government.

The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.

The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress.

The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.

It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened.

Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention.
It is best not to straddle ideals.

In these days of danger when democracy must be more than vigilant, there can be no connivance with the kind of politics which has internally weakened nations abroad before the enemy has struck from without.

It is best for America to have the fight out here and now.

I wish to give the Democratic Party the opportunity to make its historic decision clearly and without equivocation. The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time.

By declining the honor of the nomination for the presidency, I can restore that opportunity to the convention. I so do.

This letter was never sent. But it still got around. And of course, Eleanor gave her "No Ordinary Time" speech at the convention, FDR got his choice for VP, against the wishes of the reactionary right wing of the party and the rest is history.

But can anyone think of a politician on the American scene today with the intestinal fortitude to write such letter, much less let it be known that such a letter existed?

 

[Opoponax]

Sounds like Bernie Sanders stuff. And that's why he remains popular. Oddly enough, the notion that progressives want progressive policies didn't occur to the DNC until it was too late. The GOP has never abandoned its conservative mantras, no matter how destructive, while the Democrats have allowed themselves to be pulled to the right in an effort to gain more voters.

In 2020, hopefully the DNC can field some true progressive firebrands to defeat Pence. If Sanders is up to the job (I'm thinking age here), then he should be the man. If not him, then someone who espouses what he does.

 

[ElectEngr]

Henry Wallace was nominated for Vice President..

Later,
ElectEngr

 

[Malintent]

If only our leaders today had big brass ones like the man in the wheelchair.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT LETTER TO THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION

July 18, 1940

Members of the Convention:

In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government.

The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.

The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress.

The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.

It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened.

Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention.
It is best not to straddle ideals.

In these days of danger when democracy must be more than vigilant, there can be no connivance with the kind of politics which has internally weakened nations abroad before the enemy has struck from without.

It is best for America to have the fight out here and now.

I wish to give the Democratic Party the opportunity to make its historic decision clearly and without equivocation. The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time.

By declining the honor of the nomination for the presidency, I can restore that opportunity to the convention. I so do.

This letter was never sent. But it still got around. And of course, Eleanor gave her "No Ordinary Time" speech at the convention, FDR got his choice for VP, against the wishes of the reactionary right wing of the party and the rest is history.

But can anyone think of a politician on the American scene today with the intestinal fortitude to write such letter, much less let it be known that such a letter existed?

John McCain.

 

[J842P]

Henry Wallace was nominated for Vice President..

Later,
ElectEngr

Yes, and unfortunately, he was dropped from the ticket in the 1944 election in favor of Harry Truman. Truman was a fool, who surrounded himself with rabid anti-communists and right-wingers. The rest is history.

Oh how different the world would be today if Wallace had been vice-president when Roosevelt died, or if Roosevelt had been able to live another couple of years. Our relationship with the Soviet Union and the Cold War could have totally been avoided.

 

[Derec]

Yes, and unfortunately, he was dropped from the ticket in the 1944 election in favor of Harry Truman. Truman was a fool, who surrounded himself with rabid anti-communists and right-wingers. The rest is history.

Oh how different the world would be today if Wallace had been vice-president when Roosevelt died, or if Roosevelt had been able to live another couple of years. Our relationship with the Soviet Union and the Cold War could have totally been avoided.

Or perhaps Soviets would have used Wallace's soft stance toward them to roll over more parts of Europe than they already did. Germany would probably have fallen, West Berlin for sure.

Also, if Wallace wouldn't have dropped the nuclear bombs on Japan, WWII would have lasted months longer.

 

[J842P]

Yes, and unfortunately, he was dropped from the ticket in the 1944 election in favor of Harry Truman. Truman was a fool, who surrounded himself with rabid anti-communists and right-wingers. The rest is history.

Oh how different the world would be today if Wallace had been vice-president when Roosevelt died, or if Roosevelt had been able to live another couple of years. Our relationship with the Soviet Union and the Cold War could have totally been avoided.

Or perhaps Soviets would have used Wallace's soft stance toward them to roll over more parts of Europe than they already did. Germany would probably have fallen, West Berlin for sure.

Also, if Wallace wouldn't have dropped the nuclear bombs on Japan, WWII would have lasted months longer.

Both of these points are highly doubtful. Germany/Berlin likely would not have become the hotpoints they did if Wallace/Roosevelt had been in charge. While Stalin likely never planned to keep to the spirit of Yalta qua democratic rule, it was the highly adversarial manner that Truman and his administration engaged the Russians with that gave power to Soviet hardliners, especially after Stalin's death, and encourage calls for expanding their "buffer zone". Given their point of view, it was very easy to imagine that the USA and Great Britain simply wanted to invade Russia to take over their territories (which, recall, they paid for with millions of Soviet lives). More importantly, the Russians very suspicious of their Western neighbors, and rightfully so, since they were getting invaded regularly during the preceding century.

As for WWII lasting a couple more months, that is hardly a high price to pay for avoiding half a century of bloodshed spread over the entire world, and only avoiding nuclear war because of dumb luck.