A portion of a speech delivered by Harry S. Truman on March 29, 1952:

“The real Republican campaign is not going to be fought on the issues. The Republicans are going to wage a campaign of phony propaganda. They are going to try what we might call the “white is black” and the “black is white” strategy.

The Republicans are all set to try this “white is black” technique. And this is the way it will work. First of all, they will try to make people believe that everything the Government has done for the country is socialism. They will go to the people and say: “Did you see that social security check you received the other day—you thought that was good for you, didn’t you? That’s just too bad! That’s nothing in the world but socialism. Did you see that new flood control dam the Government is building over there for the protection of your property? Sorry—that’s awful socialism! That new hospital that they are building is socialism. Price supports, more socialism for the farmers! Minimum wage laws? Socialism for labor! Socialism is bad for you, my friend. Everybody knows that. And here you are, with your new car, and your home, and better opportunities for the kids, and a television set—you are just surrounded by socialism!”




  1. Mr. Fusion says:

    DZ Huang,

    If any government can ever run any business with competitors successfully, then the looser should have been Ronald Reagan, the laughter should have been Mikhail Gorbachev,

    And what “business” was Reagan in? Selling arms to Iran? Ignoring the law?

    Your wing nut obsession here is truly blinding.

  2. Toxic Asshead says:

    #39 – I agree, war is a waste. It should be: America tells someone to knock it off, they don’t, America nukes them out of existence so fast there is no response, therefore no war.

  3. Thomas says:

    #36
    RE: Cuba

    Are we now counting the funding of rebels as a “war”? You later claim that Grenada and Panama aren’t wars (which I agree, but they were called into question. In order to answer how many wars were won, we’d have to define what we mean by “war”.) but want to count funding insurgency as a war? Seriously. It was Kennedy’s choice to invade, the conflict was his and he blew it.

    RE: Persian Gulf War

    Iraq still had the fourth largest army in the world, was defending their home turf and outnumbered collation forces at the outset of the ground war. Just because we won handily does not make it any less of a victory.

    Both the Persian Gulf War and the recent war in Iraq are clearly victories. Just because we have troops there, does not mean the war isn’t over. We had troops in Europe and Japan for decades after World War II.

    RE: Vietnam

    I’ll even buy sharing the blame between Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. To assign the loss to any one person is nonsense.

    RE: Eisenhower’s campaign to get out of Korea

    One of Eisenhower’s low points was his criticism of Marshall and the Korea engagement. As Truman aptly said during his campaign, Eisenhower had all the same information that Marshall and the military commanders had, if he had a better suggestion for winning in Korea, he should have said it earlier rather than waiting for the campaign trail.

    Had the Chinese sent millions into Korea, the A-bomb would have neutralized their numbers and cut them off. We had air superiority, naval superiority, better weapons and the a-bomb. We could have cut them off from the peninsula and sued for peace.

    Regardless, if we count major engagements, since the turn of the century, and to be kind, I’ll exclude Panama and Grenada (which involved 8800 and 14000 troops respectively, but ok) and count Vietnam as a 1/4 loss for all four President’s involved that gives us:

    Republicans: W: 2 L: 0.25
    Democrats: W: 0 L: 0.75

    This excludes Cuba since it is arguably just a loss of a major skirmish rather than a war.

  4. Thomas says:

    #37
    How are you determining whether a war was justified? Is it just because a country was attacked? By that measure, Britain and France were not justified in going to war with the Nazis until 1940, right? Furthermore, France was not justified in helping us win the Revolution right?

    Waiting until you are attacked directly to “justify” a war is not always sufficient. Frankly, we should have gone to war against Hitler earlier. If the Japanese had not attacked, Germany would have controlled Europe by the time we got around to justifying our involvement.

  5. pedro's (very embarassed) daddy says:

    pedro my ignorant goat phooking bastard I pay for,

    you are so angry. why do you have to be so angry. come back to the tin hovel. The village have promised not to laugh too much at how the wind makes that whistling sound when it blows through your head.

    your cousin doodydo says hi. he wanted to write something but he had to go to some tea bag convention or something. they needed someone to make their signs and doodydoo was retarded enough to get the job.

    your mother wants to know if that rash around your mouth has cleared up. She still has some of the medication the VD clinic gave her for the same thing.

    pedro, be nice to people.

  6. Rick Cain says:

    You know, there was a time before government programs, before social security.

    People died in the streets, people starved to death, people couldn’t get decent health care.

    Truly a free market paradise.

  7. Thomas says:

    #47
    When was that exactly? You’d have to go back to a time before the Romans to find a time before government programs.

    Indeed, before that capitalist paradise, we had feudalism, monarchies and dictators. I’m sure you think that was much better.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5876 access attempts in the last 7 days.