"Following the assassination of President McKinley in September 1901, Roosevelt, at age 42, became the youngest United States President in history. Leading his party and country into the Progressive Era, he championed his "Square Deal" domestic policies, promising the average citizen fairness, breaking of trusts, regulation of railroads, and pure food and drugs. Making conservation a top priority, he established myriad new national parks, forests, and monuments intended to preserve the nation's natural resources. In foreign policy, he focused on Central America, where he began construction of the Panama Canal. He greatly expanded the United States Navy, and sent the Great White Fleet on a world tour to project the United States' naval power around the globe. His successful efforts to end the Russo-Japanese War won him the 1906 Nobel Peace Prize."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt
28 comments:
Square Deal = TR
New Deal = FDR
Raw Deal = Obama
Fair Deal = Trump
While their love of the media sort of mirror each other, They are very different.
My grandfather's middle name was Roosevelt. He was born in 1903. It always chafed him that people thought he was named after FDR.
Take from the dresser of deal, lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet on which she embroidered fantails once
ELB, I'm also kind of thinking about the bullishness/bully pulpit thing.
Bows and flows of angel hair and ice cream castles in the air
and feather canyons everywhere, I've looked at clouds that way.
I don't know how the Roosevelt family made its money but by the time Teddy came along the Roosevelts were American royalty with royalty's disdain for what they would have called "trade." Trump is trade. The disdain translated to Teddy's progressive zeal to regulate regulate regulate. Trump says he'll be a deregulator to get the economy going again. Whether he'll follow through on that promise remains to be seen. But as Evi writes, "they are very different."
Trump approves of the individual mandate in Obamacare.
deborah said...ELB, I'm also kind of thinking about the bullishness/bully pulpit thing.
"Bully" reminded me of Teddy Brewster in Arsenic And Old Lace.
Amartel said...Trump approves of the individual mandate in Obamacare.
How do you get rid of the individual mandate and keep the EMTLA?
lol chick. I don't think I've seen that movie with Grant. Did Bob Crane do re-make?
Bob Crane made movies? I thought he just watched them.
Too easy!
Teddy was a short little underdeveloped scrawny kid.
That whole rough 'em tough 'em ride em cowboy stuff was muy ridiculoso.
supre compensation totalmente.
Know what I mean?
The other cowboys laughed and laughed at his oversized fancy guns and his bedazzled leather chaps. (shaps)
Bluster to make up for his exceedingly weak beginning. He was obsessed in the way Earnest Hemingway was obsessed. You wen't a man until you shot something and they meant it. It's everything.
Oh, how they laughed and laughed at his expensive gear he brought with him. But he did prove himself.
He was a progressive Republican, but Republicans started hating the "progressive" label ever since his cousin FDR started wiping the floor and kicking their asses with it.
Bernie is FDR's legacy. And FDR is really not much more than the more successful (and more progressive) iteration of TR.
Either way, it's good to get Republicans to finally ponder the more sensible roots of their party's history.
I think TR gets a bad rap as a Progressive. He was about what it could have been.
Woody Wilson and the rest betrayed the ideal.
chickelit said...
Square Deal = TR
New Deal = FDR
Raw Deal = Obama
Fair Deal = Trump
Fair Deal was Truman.
Real Deal may well be Trump.
Chip Ahoy said...
Teddy was a short little underdeveloped scrawny kid.
That whole rough 'em tough 'em ride em cowboy stuff was muy ridiculoso.
He built himself up in his adolescence. He went West when his wife died and it made a man of him.
The guy had the hat and the cattle.
Rhythm and Balls said...
He was a progressive Republican, but Republicans started hating the "progressive" label ever since his cousin FDR started wiping the floor and kicking their asses with it.
As always, Ritmo gets it wrong.
Frank was a Socialist. And not a good one; most of his ideas were bad formulations of other people's thinking. After all, he attenuated the Depression by at least 5 years because of his blundering and needed Tojo to bail him out.
He was a politician and a propagandist, more than anything.
Kind of a Barack Obama with better speechwriters.
Ed:
"And FDR is really not much more than the more successful (and more progressive) iteration of TR."
IIRC the New Deal into'd ADC, aid to dependent children. The catch was it was only available to fatherless households, which was the beginning of father absence in the black community, which led to all the rest.
"You wen't a man until you shot something and they meant it. It's everything.'
Yeah, TR and Hemingway had a weird kind of love of war and killing things. TR's was probably more understandable. He grew up in the shadow of the 19th centuries version of the "Greatest Generation Ever" i.e. the Civil war vets. His dad stayed out of the fighting and hired a substitute. TR grew up wanting to be the guy on Cemetery Hill stopping Pickett's Charge or Marching through Georgia. Charging up San Juan Hill was the result.
Is it telling that Alexander the Great and Napoleon were both short in stature?
I have a longish Trump comment I put up on Facebook that I'm certain no one will read. I'm throwing it out here, because I know at least someone will be able to stay awake long enough to get through it. It helps to read the linked piece first.
This article brilliantly nails Trump’s appeal: He represents a nihilistic protest vote against a postmodern class system that has grown up under our noses, and about which no one in the politer parts of the country seems willing to speak plainly or even to acknowledge.
The bicoastal educated (particularly the East Coast contingent) will, when speaking of Britain, go on about the ridiculous and/or terrible class system. Meanwhile, we have managed to create a class system more pernicious than the British, first, because it is unacknowledged for what it is, and, second, given American history and conditions, it is one that threatens greater dysfunction and disunity. The author here is British and sees these things with a clearer eye than those of us who are fogged by our exquisite identity politics and self-congratulatory simultaneous pretended empowerment of and contempt for those who find themselves in unfashionable conditions, regionally, economically, and, yes, racially.
Does a regime and aristocracy sound familiar, that at once tramples and enrages the peasantry, smothers the petit bourgeoisie, makes a mockery of morals, all the while filled with self-interested hypocrites proclaiming high-minded principles? (Hint: “Allons infants de la patrie…”) So, you might consider a President Trump as a better relief valve than a Citizen Robespierre, who I fear one day may slouch back from the grave with a new name, his head firmly attached, and his voice sporting a fly-over country twang.
Edit the above to "and real contempt for those..." at the end of the third paragraph. "Real" should be contrasted with "pretended."
I have a longish Trump comment I put up on Facebook that I'm certain no one will read. I'm throwing it out here, because I know at least someone will be able to stay awake long enough to get through it. It helps to read the linked piece first.
I always read your stuff, Tim -- well except for Facebook stuff which I refuse to join out of personal loathing for Marc Zuckerberg.
I think that the "bicoastal elite" could have pulled off their globalization scheme had they restricted it to an assault on the underclass and low-wage workers. But, when the Republicans joined the Democrats, calling for unrestricted importation of the highly educated and skilled, they created a unique "from the bottom" and "from the top" squeeze on the native middle class. That was the bridge too far which now leads to barriers.
IIRC the New Deal into'd ADC, aid to dependent children. The catch was it was only available to fatherless households, which was the beginning of father absence in the black community, which led to all the rest.
No. The beginning of fatherless households in the black community was when they were ripped apart from their families in the Middle Passage of the slave trade and then, again, when slave children were "fathered" by the white Irish plantation-owning slaveowner who used his negress as a concubine and had her raise the kid as a slave child without really acknowledging why such paternity should have anything to do with "fathering". At least 30% of black American DNA is European-"derived". And it's not as if slaves were allowed to maintain intact families anyway, even if they wanted to.
So, you might consider a President Trump as a better relief valve than a Citizen Robespierre, who I fear one day may slouch back from the grave with a new name, his head firmly attached, and his voice sporting a fly-over country twang.
We call that man "Ted Cruz."
I think that the "bicoastal elite" could have pulled off their globalization scheme had they restricted it to an assault on the underclass and low-wage workers. But, when the Republicans joined the Democrats, calling for unrestricted importation of the highly educated and skilled, they created a unique "from the bottom" and "from the top" squeeze on the native middle class. That was the bridge too far which now leads to barriers.
Yes. There it is. Last week a friend who works as a Controls Engineer in materials handling, said the company he works for had started bringing in CE's from Egypt on H-3 visas who are willing to work for less than the current American hirees coming out of college, and far less than those with experience in the field. He fears for his job.
That same company also recently made the news over talk that they were sending 300 local manufacturing jobs to Mexico, which ticked off the union.
In this situation, those who do hands-on work with physical materials and those who attend to the electronic manipulation and engineering of those physical materials are beginning to realize that the much needed "wall" Trump speaks of needs to consist of more than rocks and wire.
Good thing I read your 10:59 comment last night TT, I appreciated it.
Thank you, MamaM. I pulled it because it was too controversial and immodest. I put up something similar on Facebook, but yanked that even earlier. There are reasons to write on the internet, but sometimes there are more reasons not to.
Post a Comment