Tender Mercies: A Love Story

[JoeB131]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

 

[Camp]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

You dope....then why did Stalin have Armand Hammer talk Roosevelt into sending him the the kitchen sink????


1. "The millionaire industrialist, Armand Hammer played a key role in laying the foundations of Lend-Lease.As a dyed-in-the-wool collaborator of Lenin´s and Stalin’s in procuring Western, especially American, assistance in the industrialization of the USSR.....in November 1940 Armand Hammer met with FDR in the White House. He and the president discussed the idea of developing American military assistance to Britain, the Neutrality Act and Roosevelt’s campaign promises not to embroil the United States in the European war to the contrary.

Roosevelt thereupon suggested to Hammer that he discuss this plan with Harry Hopkins.Hopkins twice traveled to New York City, Hammer´s base of operations, to discuss this idea with officials and businessmen there.”
Roosevelt's Lend-Lease Act: The Arm and Hammer / Hammer and Sickle Connection




2. "He could have flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to."

But he needed Allied aid to defeat the much smaller and less well supplied Nazis???

And....why was Roosevelt sending him materials that the Allies needed?

Supplies didn't just "flow" to the Soviet Union, they flooded it, including non-military supplies: a tire plant, an oil refinery, pipe-fabricating works, over a million miles of copper wire, switchboard-panels, lathes and power tools, textile machinery, woodworking, typesetting, cranes hoists, derricks, air compressors, $152 million in women's 'dress goods,' 18.4 million pounds of writing paper, cigarette cases, jeweled watches, lipstick, liquor, bathtubs, and pianos.



Here was the best idea:
3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever that it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'
Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"

 

[PoliticalChic]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

 

[JoeB131]

Supplies didn't just "flow" to the Soviet Union, they flooded it, including non-military supplies: a tire plant, an oil refinery, pipe-fabricating works, over a million miles of copper wire, switchboard-panels, lathes and power tools, textile machinery, woodworking, typesetting, cranes hoists, derricks, air compressors, $152 million in women's 'dress goods,' 18.4 million pounds of writing paper, cigarette cases, jeweled watches, lipstick, liquor, bathtubs, and pianos.

How did they win the war with bathtubs?

Okay, again, reality check. Stalin's industrialization took Russia from the country that lost WWI to the country that WON WWII.

It's really that simple.

 

[Camp]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

"Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason..."

This post is a good example of why you are called a liar.

 

[bullwinkle]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":
"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":
"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

Camp, you and I are in complete agreement. When I read this original post, I couldn't help but remember the Steven Hawking quote, "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."BTW, didn't Burns do a documentary on the Roosevelts?

1. Well, well....another government school grad checking in.
It is no longer a surprise that your sort is oblivious to not having received an actual education.

2. "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."
Amusing that you use the term "knowledge," seeing as you have such an estranged relationship with the concept.

3.None of you has been able to point to a single error in any of my posts....they are all correct and accurate.
Seems that 'Liberal indoctrination' permanently removes any ability to actually think, eh?

No, MS Chic, your posts are cherry-picked and cobbled, like your knowledge of the times. I'm not out to convert you though, be my guest, continue to promote antique discord. Nor will I take time to disprove your cynical view of the past which I suspect is an effort to make your present view more presentable. Those of us who lived those times, the good and the bad, will soon be beyond your pompous pronouncements anyway. BTW, I presume you have more than what you posted as documentation of your 'facts', like say the testimony of two men?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's do what Roosevelt didn't do....take a look into the nature of his "Uncle Joe."



7. Stalin was born in Georgia, began learning to speak Russian when he was eight or nine. He took the nickname 'Koba,' a character in a popular book.
" The Patricide... is a novel by Alexander Kazbegi, first published in 1882. The novel is a love story, but it also addresses many socio-political issues of 19th century Georgia. The novel portrays critical realism of the 19th century.... The novel takes place in 19th century Georgia, when Georgia was occupied by the Russian Empire."
The Patricide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Based on his background, one might imagine that Stalin had a soft spot, 'tender mercy' for his homeland, Georgia.
Wrong.



In 1921, Lenin, and Stalin, annexed Georgia. And Stalin advised it be done with maximum force.
He demanded of the local Bolsheviks:

" You must draw a white-hot iron over this Georgian land!… It seems to me you have already forgotten the principle of the dictatorship of the proletariat. You will have to break the wings of this Georgia! Let the blood of the petit bourgeois flow until they give up all their resistance!
Impale them! Tear them apart!"
Suggestion Box for Future Book Discussions ~
and Many Georgians Take Pride In Their Infamous Native Son


Stalin: "... Let the blood of the petit bourgeois flow...."
Roosevelt was the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, ....did he know what was going on in the world?



Roosevelt: " I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man.Harry [Hopkins] says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."

What a moron, eh?

...or sycophant of the world's greatest terrorist?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":
"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":
"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

Camp, you and I are in complete agreement. When I read this original post, I couldn't help but remember the Steven Hawking quote, "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."BTW, didn't Burns do a documentary on the Roosevelts?

1. Well, well....another government school grad checking in.
It is no longer a surprise that your sort is oblivious to not having received an actual education.

2. "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."
Amusing that you use the term "knowledge," seeing as you have such an estranged relationship with the concept.

3.None of you has been able to point to a single error in any of my posts....they are all correct and accurate.
Seems that 'Liberal indoctrination' permanently removes any ability to actually think, eh?

No, MS Chic, your posts are cherry-picked and cobbled, like your knowledge of the times. I'm not out to convert you though, be my guest, continue to promote antique discord. Nor will I take time to disprove your cynical view of the past which I suspect is an effort to make your present view more presentable. Those of us who lived those times, the good and the bad, will soon be beyond your pompous pronouncements anyway. BTW, I presume you have more than what you posted as documentation of your 'facts', like say the testimony of two men?

" Nor will I take time to disprove..."

Right.

Two posts by you with not the slightest hint of any more than "is not....is not......"

My posts are linked, sourced, quoted....

You are free to do the extensive research on any of 'em.


Here's a really fun place for you to start...."Koba The Dread: Laughter And The Twenty Million," by Martin Amis.

Check out the man Franklin Roosevelt fell in love with.

 

[Camp]

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

"Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason..."

This post is a good example of why you are called a liar.

Actually I don't get called a liar to often. When I do it is mostly from you or some other poster from this site who gets lost for worlds or angry about being bitch slapped.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

"Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason..."

This post is a good example of why you are called a liar.

Actually I don't get called a liar to often. When I do it is mostly from you or some other poster from this site who gets lost for worlds or angry about being bitch slapped.

Correct me if I am wrong....didn't you once post that Roosevelt was a man with a "moral compass"?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, they aren't. YOu obviously don't know enough about military stuff to realize the huge advantage Stalin had in Europe.

He couldhave flicked the allies off the continent any time he wanted to.

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

"Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason..."

This post is a good example of why you are called a liar.

Actually I don't get called a liar to often. When I do it is mostly from you or some other poster from this site who gets lost for worlds or angry about being bitch slapped.

C'mon, now...don't be shy.


Didn't you once make the egregious error of claiming that the megalomaniac Franklin Roosevelt was a man with "a moral compass"?


That was you, wasn't it?

 

[Camp]

PolitcalChic has no expertise in military matters or history. She just spends an evening at a Holiday Inn and becomes an expert long enough to write her drivel and play like she has knowledge about these topics.

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

"Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason..."

This post is a good example of why you are called a liar.

Actually I don't get called a liar to often. When I do it is mostly from you or some other poster from this site who gets lost for worlds or angry about being bitch slapped.

Correct me if I am wrong....didn't you once post that Roosevelt was a man with a "moral compass"?

You should really give it up lady. People way smarter than you have been slamming away at FDR for 80 years and he is still rated as one of our greatest President's of all time. Always in the top four and the last few years he has been surpassing Jefferson, putting him in the top three. His accomplishments and legacy has outpaced any President in the 20th Century.
Your promotion of FDR as being some kind of communist dupe and being manipulated by Stalin is an old worn out conspiracy theory that does nothing but insult American history as it distorts and misinforms. Nothing you are rehashing is original or new. You are just a wanna be political writer writing with not an ounce of originality or creativity. But you have been a great conduit for bumping FDR into the spotlight.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Not only do I know sooooo much more than you do....but, unlike you....I don't lie.

Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason other than they disagree with your opinion. That also makes you a liar. Liars like you never use the phrase "in my opinion" or the word "allegedly". You just give an opinion, insist it is fact, and when someone disagrees with you, you call them a liar. You calling them a liar makes you a liar.

"Knowingly and willfully presenting data that has been discredited after you have been informed and shown that it is false is lying. You have hence, been a consistent and routine proven liar and fraud here at USMB for years. You call others liars for no reason..."

This post is a good example of why you are called a liar.

Actually I don't get called a liar to often. When I do it is mostly from you or some other poster from this site who gets lost for worlds or angry about being bitch slapped.

Correct me if I am wrong....didn't you once post that Roosevelt was a man with a "moral compass"?

You should really give it up lady. People way smarter than you have been slamming away at FDR for 80 years and he is still rated as one of our greatest President's of all time. Always in the top four and the last few years he has been surpassing Jefferson, putting him in the top three. His accomplishments and legacy has outpaced any President in the 20th Century.
Your promotion of FDR as being some kind of communist dupe and being manipulated by Stalin is an old worn out conspiracy theory that does nothing but insult American history as it distorts and misinforms. Nothing you are rehashing is original or new. You are just a wanna be political writer writing with not an ounce of originality or creativity. But you have been a great conduit for bumping FDR into the spotlight.

What???

Changing the subject????

Excellent: so you recognize how really dumb it was to say that Roosevelt, who embraced Stalin as soon as he became President, was a man with a "moral compass."


But.....was it an error......or a lie designed to accomplish your usual defense of the man?

Which one?

Better say it was just a mistake.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well....since you're gonna run and hide, let's rub it in.....

Roosevelt....'moral compass'????

8. Robert C. Tucker, Sovietologist historian, known best as a biographer of Stalin, wrote:
"Nowhere [during the 'Great Purge'] were victims subjected to more atrocious treatment than in Georgia."
"Stalin in Power: The Revolution from Above, 1928-1941," by Robert C. Tucker, p. 488.

Stalin's version of 'a hometown discount'...on display to the 'moral compass' guy,FDR....


a. Mamia Oreakhelashvili: " After theSovietization of Georgia, Orakhelashvili served as chairman of the GeorgianRevkom and secretary of the Central Committee of the Georgian Communist Party. He later became deputy chairman of the Georgian Council of People’s Commissars ..."
Mamia Orakhelashvili - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


During the 'great terror purges' of the late 1930s, 425 of the 644 members of the Georgian party congress were put to death.

Oreakhelashvili had his eyes put out and his eardrums perforated while his wife was forced to watch.

Stalin's tender mercies, as seen by the guy with the 'moral compass.'


b. Then there was party chief Nestor Lakoba, who had died before the purges, and buried with honor. They had his body dug up and burned, and is wife tortured to death in the presence of his 14-year-old son. The son was sent to the gulag....than brought back and shot.


c. Buda Mdivani was a veteran Georgian Bolshevik and Soviet government official energetically involved in the Russian Revolutions and the Civil War, who led Georgian Communist opposition to Joseph Stalin's centralizing policy....he was tortured for three months, and then shot....his wife, four sons, an daughter, were then shot as well.





9. Yet, even after the above, and the show trials.....Roosevelt said "I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."


This is the 'moral compass' of the icon of the Progressives.

 

[PoliticalChic]

mor·al com·pass
noun

1. used in reference to a person's ability to judge what is right and wrong and act accordingly. Google

Who dat'?

 

[Agit8r]

Far be it from I

I know that you people have you own math, science, and history... but now you have your own grammar?!?

 

[Camp]

Well....since you're gonna run and hide, let's rub it in.....

Roosevelt....'moral compass'????

8. Robert C. Tucker, Sovietologist historian, known best as a biographer of Stalin, wrote:
"Nowhere [during the 'Great Purge'] were victims subjected to more atrocious treatment than in Georgia."
"Stalin in Power: The Revolution from Above, 1928-1941," by Robert C. Tucker, p. 488.

Stalin's version of 'a hometown discount'...on display to the 'moral compass' guy,FDR....


a. Mamia Oreakhelashvili: " After theSovietization of Georgia, Orakhelashvili served as chairman of the GeorgianRevkom and secretary of the Central Committee of the Georgian Communist Party. He later became deputy chairman of the Georgian Council of People’s Commissars ..."
Mamia Orakhelashvili - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


During the 'great terror purges' of the late 1930s, 425 of the 644 members of the Georgian party congress were put to death.

Oreakhelashvili had his eyes put out and his eardrums perforated while his wife was forced to watch.

Stalin's tender mercies, as seen by the guy with the 'moral compass.'


b. Then there was party chief Nestor Lakoba, who had died before the purges, and buried with honor. They had his body dug up and burned, and is wife tortured to death in the presence of his 14-year-old son. The son was sent to the gulag....than brought back and shot.


c. Buda Mdivani was a veteran Georgian Bolshevik and Soviet government official energetically involved in the Russian Revolutions and the Civil War, who led Georgian Communist opposition to Joseph Stalin's centralizing policy....he was tortured for three months, and then shot....his wife, four sons, an daughter, were then shot as well.





9. Yet, even after the above, and the show trials.....Roosevelt said "I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."


This is the 'moral compass' of the icon of the Progressives.

Really? You are going to lecture us on the President who was made famous in part by by implementing Christian values in the New Deal projects that more closely followed the teaching of Christ then any other President before or since? That guy was the moral compass for the nation and the nation accepted it as such. Four times elected ding bat. He was elected and reelected over and over.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Far be it from I

I know that you people have you own math, science, and history... but now you have your own grammar?!?

Yikes!

Me wrong!