The Yardstick By Which To Measure Presidents.

[Bfgrn]

And Herbert Hoover is an example of republican president who is justifiably treated dismissively by journalists and historians due to the fact he adhered blindly to conservative fiscal dogma, to the detriment of the Nation.

And Hoover bitterly lamented it is his memoirs.

What NEVER works is what Herbert Hoover and Andrew Mellon did to bring on the Great Depression...liquidate, and austerity. Unless you also believe Medieval blood letting save lives? They listened to what would later become the 'Austrian' school.

Economic Policy Under Hoover

Throughout this decline—which carried real GNP per worker down to a level 40 percent below that which it had attained in 1929, and which saw the unemployment rise to take in more than a quarter of the labor force—the government did not try to prop up aggregate demand. The only expansionary fiscal policy action undertaken was the Veterans’ Bonus, passed over President Hoover’s veto. That aside, the full employment budget surplus did not fall over 1929–33.

The Federal Reserve did not use open market operations to keep the nominal money supply from falling. Instead, its only significant systematic use of open market operations was in the other direction: to raise interest rates and discourage gold outflows after the United Kingdom abandoned the gold standard in the fall of 1931.

This inaction did not come about because they did not understand the tools of monetary policy. This inaction did not come about because the Federal Reserve was constrained by the necessity of defending the gold standard. The Federal Reserve knew what it was doing: it was letting the private sector handle the Depression in its own fashion. It saw the private sector’s task as the “liquidation” of the American economy. It feared that expansionary monetary policy would impede the necessary private-sector process of readjustment.

Contemplating in retrospect the wreck of his country’s economy and his own presidency, Herbert Hoover wrote bitterly in his memoirs about those who had advised inaction during the downslide:

The ‘leave-it-alone liquidationists’ headed by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon…felt that government must keep its hands off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only one formula: ‘Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate’.…He held that even panic was not altogether a bad thing. He said: ‘It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people’.


The Federal Reserve took almost no steps to halt the slide into the Great Depression over 1929–33. Instead, the Federal Reserve acted as if appropriate policy was not to try to avoid the oncoming Great Depression, but to allow it to run its course and “liquidate” the unprofitable portions of the private economy.

In adopting such “liquidationist” policies, the Federal Reserve was merely following the recommendations provided by an economic theory of depressions that was in fact common before the Keynesian Revolution and was held by economists like Friedrich Hayek, Lionel Robbins, and Joseph Schumpeter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hayward is just a tiny bit biased, he works for the AEI.............................. NOT a historian's historian by any means.

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

What is the import of his alleged 'bias' if everything he says is true?

AEI doesn't allow truth to be spoken. Ask David Frum who was fired for speaking the truth or the AEI 'scholars who were ordered not to speak to the media during the health care debate because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind by Bruce Bartlett

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

 

[Peach]

Hayward is just a tiny bit biased, he works for the AEI.............................. NOT a historian's historian by any means.

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

What is the import of his alleged 'bias' if everything he says is true?

Tough to find "errors" in OPINION pieces, but Hayward is too biased to consider this history. Look up some of his other "works".

 

[Wiseacre]

And Herbert Hoover is an example of republican president who is justifiably treated dismissively by journalists and historians due to the fact he adhered blindly to conservative fiscal dogma, to the detriment of the Nation.

Really? Hoover passed the Smoot-Hawley bill to raise tariffs (protectionism), increased gov't spending, and raised taxes; the marginal rate went up from 25% to 63%. Doesn't sound like blind adherence to conservatism to me, although he did try to balance the budget, as did FDR for his 1st 6 years in office.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Pure Pubcrappe. Well, the USA does better under liberals, unless you like corrupt cronyism boom and bust recessions and depressions and stupid, arrogant, cavalier, violent foreign policy...

Read "The Good Old Days- They were Terrible!" Reaganistas live in a dream world.

Getting people on assistance in a Pub DEPRESSION and regulating health care that is TOTALLY out of control is not big government, it's reality and solutions. Pub dupes! They'll tell you ANYHING and do ANYTHING to get pwer back- country be damned...

franco???

What brings you out before dark?

Time for dinner at the dumpster?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hayward is just a tiny bit biased, he works for the AEI.............................. NOT a historian's historian by any means.

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

What is the import of his alleged 'bias' if everything he says is true?

Tough to find "errors" in OPINION pieces, but Hayward is too biased to consider this history. Look up some of his other "works".

How about we stick to this one.

Still no errors?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

True. And this is consistent with the authoritarian nature of conservatism, where dissent is indeed not tolerated.

We see examples of the conservative propensity for rigid conformity in this very forum, and in this very thread.

 

[Peach]

And Herbert Hoover is an example of republican president who is justifiably treated dismissively by journalists and historians due to the fact he adhered blindly to conservative fiscal dogma, to the detriment of the Nation.

Really? Hoover passed the Smoot-Hawley bill to raise tariffs (protectionism), increased gov't spending, and raised taxes; the marginal rate went up from 25% to 63%. Doesn't sound like blind adherence to conservatism to me, although he did try to balance the budget, as did FDR for his 1st 6 years in office.

Hoover did good things for the country, AFTER he left office:

Because of Hoover's previous experience with Germany at the end of World War I, in 1946 President Harry S. Truman selected the former president to tour Germany to ascertain the food status of the occupied nation. Hoover toured what was to become West Germany in Hermann Göring's old train coach and produced a number of reports critical of U.S. occupation policy. The economy of Germany had "sunk to the lowest level in a hundred years."[88] He stated in one report:
There is the illusion that the New Germany left after the annexations can be reduced to a "pastoral state". It cannot be done unless we exterminate or move 25,000,000 people out of it.[89]
On Hoover’s initiative, a school meals program in the American and British occupation zones of Germany was begun on April 14, 1947. The program served 3,500,000 children aged six through 18. A total of 40,000 tons of American food was provided during the Hooverspeisung (Hoover meals).
In 1947, President Harry S. Truman appointed Hoover to a commission, which elected him chairman, to reorganize the executive departments. This became known as the Hoover Commission. He was appointed chairman of a similar commission by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953. Both found numerous inefficiencies and ways to reduce waste. The government enacted most of the recommendations that the two commissions had made: 71% of the first commission's and 64% of the second commission's.

 

[Wry Catcher]

1. Many leading academics find that the greatest modern Presidents are those that have made government bigger and more powerful, and have expanded the reach of the presidency, i.e., Woodrow Wilson and FDR. By the same token, those Presidents with a limited-government POV, such as Harding, Coolidge and Reagan, are treated dismissively by journalists and historians.


2. Prior to the 20th century, Congress was considered the apex of the American political system, but today many believe the President to be more akin to the king or religious leader described by Frazer in “The Golden Bough.” He must be the ‘great father,’ the ‘miracle worker,’ and the ‘fulfiller of all wants.’ Liberals swoon at the charisma of an Obama or a John F. Kennedy.

a. Obama supporter Peggy Joseph: “I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he’s gonna help me.”

b. Obama: "This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal."


3. The expectation of a godlike President who can or should solve all of our problems reinforces the central impulse of Liberalism, which is to politicize more and more of private life, always expanding the power of government.


4. Leftist governments infantilize their populace. When political operatives advocate doing something ‘for the children” one can see the tendency to make children out of the citizenry.

a. “Vice President Al Gore said the government should act like “grandparents in the sense that grandparents perform a nurturing role.” Cult of the Presidency

b. “…Denton Walthall, who asked a question in the second presidential debate in 1992. …Referring to voters as "symbolically the children of the future president," he asked how voters could expect the candidates "to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name it, as opposed to the wants of your political spin doctors and your political parties.” How town-hall debates can go very wrong for a candidate. - Slate Magazine


5. Citizens have accepted this, as shown by what they tell pollsters they expect: ‘experience,’ or that ‘he shares my values,’ or ‘cares about people like me’ or ‘understands the needs of the country.’ It is unlimited. What, then, is the correct yardstick by which to measure a President? Does the President take seriously his oath of office:

a. Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight

Covered more fully in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Presidents," by Steven Hayward

You're a hoot, that's what you are. A hoot. I don't know what a hoot is, but since you so easily define words like Liberal with obscure sources, I can at least define you as a hoot.

You act as if you've discovered a universal truth and dismiss Academics, Historians and Journalists with a wave of your (wing?) which gives me more evidence than you provide in drawing a conclusion. Since a Hoot is also known as a Barred Owl which gives loud shrieks and is an animal of the night who preys on the weak, and is an opportunist hunter of small minded prey I guess I'm spot on. From those who thanked your for your thread are the few, the loud and the small minded.

 

[tinydancer]

wiw U hyst wiwukd tgere,

wow thats weird. i didn't type that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

True. And this is consistent with the authoritarian nature of conservatism, where dissent is indeed not tolerated.

We see examples of the conservative propensity for rigid conformity in this very forum, and in this very thread.

"...the authoritarian nature of conservatism, where dissent is indeed not tolerated."

Does this include the lack of choice in education, healthcare, special rights for protected groups?

 

[Peach]

TR and Eisenhower are examples of republican presidents who made government bigger and more powerful, and expanded the reach of the presidency not treated dismissively by journalists and historians.

I guess some do not remember who sent troops into Little Rock..............................

More from the "historian" that is the subject of the thread:

Give 'em Hell, Sarah | The Weekly Standard

 

[Bfgrn]

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

What is the import of his alleged 'bias' if everything he says is true?

AEI doesn't allow truth to be spoken. Ask David Frum who was fired for speaking the truth or the AEI 'scholars who were ordered not to speak to the media during the health care debate because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind by Bruce Bartlett

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

It is an op-ed...

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

 

[Peach]

AEI doesn't allow truth to be spoken. Ask David Frum who was fired for speaking the truth or the AEI 'scholars who were ordered not to speak to the media during the health care debate because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind by Bruce Bartlett

I notice that you didn't list any errors in his precis......

It is an op-ed...

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Yes, Hayward writes opinion pieces, NOT history.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. Many leading academics find that the greatest modern Presidents are those that have made government bigger and more powerful, and have expanded the reach of the presidency, i.e., Woodrow Wilson and FDR. By the same token, those Presidents with a limited-government POV, such as Harding, Coolidge and Reagan, are treated dismissively by journalists and historians.


2. Prior to the 20th century, Congress was considered the apex of the American political system, but today many believe the President to be more akin to the king or religious leader described by Frazer in “The Golden Bough.” He must be the ‘great father,’ the ‘miracle worker,’ and the ‘fulfiller of all wants.’ Liberals swoon at the charisma of an Obama or a John F. Kennedy.

a. Obama supporter Peggy Joseph: “I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he’s gonna help me.”

b. Obama: "This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal."


3. The expectation of a godlike President who can or should solve all of our problems reinforces the central impulse of Liberalism, which is to politicize more and more of private life, always expanding the power of government.


4. Leftist governments infantilize their populace. When political operatives advocate doing something ‘for the children” one can see the tendency to make children out of the citizenry.

a. “Vice President Al Gore said the government should act like “grandparents in the sense that grandparents perform a nurturing role.” Cult of the Presidency

b. “…Denton Walthall, who asked a question in the second presidential debate in 1992. …Referring to voters as "symbolically the children of the future president," he asked how voters could expect the candidates "to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name it, as opposed to the wants of your political spin doctors and your political parties.” How town-hall debates can go very wrong for a candidate. - Slate Magazine


5. Citizens have accepted this, as shown by what they tell pollsters they expect: ‘experience,’ or that ‘he shares my values,’ or ‘cares about people like me’ or ‘understands the needs of the country.’ It is unlimited. What, then, is the correct yardstick by which to measure a President? Does the President take seriously his oath of office:

a. Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight

Covered more fully in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Presidents," by Steven Hayward

You're a hoot, that's what you are. A hoot. I don't know what a hoot is, but since you so easily define words like Liberal with obscure sources, I can at least define you as a hoot.

You act as if you've discovered a universal truth and dismiss Academics, Historians and Journalists with a wave of your (wing?) which gives me more evidence than you provide in drawing a conclusion. Since a Hoot is also known as a Barred Owl which gives loud shrieks and is an animal of the night who preys on the weak, and is an opportunist hunter of small minded prey I guess I'm spot on. From those who thanked your for your thread are the few, the loud and the small minded.

Hoot speaking....you rang?
Does weak-minded count....I'm about to prey on you.
"small minded prey..." No wonder you're upset with the OP!


Simple as this Wry....every President takes an oath....specified by the United States Constitution....

Whether or not that oath is kept seems a good 'yardstick.'

Don't you agree?

 

[tinydancer]

1. Many leading academics find that the greatest modern Presidents are those that have made government bigger and more powerful, and have expanded the reach of the presidency, i.e., Woodrow Wilson and FDR. By the same token, those Presidents with a limited-government POV, such as Harding, Coolidge and Reagan, are treated dismissively by journalists and historians.


2. Prior to the 20th century, Congress was considered the apex of the American political system, but today many believe the President to be more akin to the king or religious leader described by Frazer in “The Golden Bough.” He must be the ‘great father,’ the ‘miracle worker,’ and the ‘fulfiller of all wants.’ Liberals swoon at the charisma of an Obama or a John F. Kennedy.

a. Obama supporter Peggy Joseph: “I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he’s gonna help me.”

b. Obama: "This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal."


3. The expectation of a godlike President who can or should solve all of our problems reinforces the central impulse of Liberalism, which is to politicize more and more of private life, always expanding the power of government.


4. Leftist governments infantilize their populace. When political operatives advocate doing something ‘for the children” one can see the tendency to make children out of the citizenry.

a. “Vice President Al Gore said the government should act like “grandparents in the sense that grandparents perform a nurturing role.” Cult of the Presidency

b. “…Denton Walthall, who asked a question in the second presidential debate in 1992. …Referring to voters as "symbolically the children of the future president," he asked how voters could expect the candidates "to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name it, as opposed to the wants of your political spin doctors and your political parties.” How town-hall debates can go very wrong for a candidate. - Slate Magazine


5. Citizens have accepted this, as shown by what they tell pollsters they expect: ‘experience,’ or that ‘he shares my values,’ or ‘cares about people like me’ or ‘understands the needs of the country.’ It is unlimited. What, then, is the correct yardstick by which to measure a President? Does the President take seriously his oath of office:

a. Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight

Covered more fully in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Presidents," by Steven Hayward

You're a hoot, that's what you are. A hoot. I don't know what a hoot is, but since you so easily define words like Liberal with obscure sources, I can at least define you as a hoot.

You act as if you've discovered a universal truth and dismiss Academics, Historians and Journalists with a wave of your (wing?) which gives me more evidence than you provide in drawing a conclusion. Since a Hoot is also known as a Barred Owl which gives loud shrieks and is an animal of the night who preys on the weak, and is an opportunist hunter of small minded prey I guess I'm spot on. From those who thanked your for your thread are the few, the loud and the small minded.

Christians have been the best scientists on the planet asswipe. Would you like to dance with me?

By all means, lets dance.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The ‘leave-it-alone liquidationists’ headed by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon…felt that government must keep its hands off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only one formula: ‘Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate’.…He held that even panic was not altogether a bad thing. He said: ‘It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people’.

Telling.

We hear conservatives now making the same failed argument with regard to the December 2007 recession – note how conservatives today are just as callous as they were 82 years ago with regard to the suffering of the American people. Note also the typical conservative arrogance and elitism, they presume to ‘know what’s best’ for the people, including their ‘moral life’ and ‘values.’

The conservative failure to learn from history is as dangerous as the failed policies they advocate.

 

[Bfgrn]

The ‘leave-it-alone liquidationists’ headed by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon…felt that government must keep its hands off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only one formula: ‘Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate’.…He held that even panic was not altogether a bad thing. He said: ‘It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people’.

Telling.

We hear conservatives now making the same failed argument with regard to the December 2007 recession – note how conservatives today are just as callous as they were 82 years ago with regard to the suffering of the American people. Note also the typical conservative arrogance and elitism, they presume to ‘know what’s best’ for the people, including their ‘moral life’ and ‘values.’

The conservative failure to learn from history is as dangerous as the failed policies they advocate.

Harry agrees:

"Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home--but not for housing. They are strong for labor--but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They approve of social security benefits-so much so that they took them away from almost a million people. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine--for people who can afford them. They believe in international trade--so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement. They favor the admission of displaced persons--but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They say TVA is wonderful--but we ought never to try it again. They condemn "cruelly high prices"--but fight to the death every effort to bring them down. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."
President Harry S. Truman

 

[Peach]

The ‘leave-it-alone liquidationists’ headed by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon…felt that government must keep its hands off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only one formula: ‘Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate’.…He held that even panic was not altogether a bad thing. He said: ‘It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people’.

Telling.

We hear conservatives now making the same failed argument with regard to the December 2007 recession – note how conservatives today are just as callous as they were 82 years ago with regard to the suffering of the American people. Note also the typical conservative arrogance and elitism, they presume to ‘know what’s best’ for the people, including their ‘moral life’ and ‘values.’

The conservative failure to learn from history is as dangerous as the failed policies they advocate.

Hoover was NOT "callous"; Hoover did not see a Federal government solution to the Great Depression, and, in fact, it was the rise of the Third Reich that pulled the US fully out of the Depression. There was a slump in 1938 that could have led the US straight down again.

 

[Wiseacre]

The ‘leave-it-alone liquidationists’ headed by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon…felt that government must keep its hands off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only one formula: ‘Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate’.…He held that even panic was not altogether a bad thing. He said: ‘It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people’.

Telling.

We hear conservatives now making the same failed argument with regard to the December 2007 recession – note how conservatives today are just as callous as they were 82 years ago with regard to the suffering of the American people. Note also the typical conservative arrogance and elitism, they presume to ‘know what’s best’ for the people, including their ‘moral life’ and ‘values.’
The conservative failure to learn from history is as dangerous as the failed policies they advocate.

That's rich, coming from a leftwinger.