Friday, June 09, 2006

President Teddy Roosevelt: Modern Day Democrat??

GOI: The Great Bull Moose T.R. on criticizing the President of the United States of America:

"He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able and disinterested service to the nation as a whole.

Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.

To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

GOI: I wonder though, would Teddy be a Republican in today's political arena? Take for example T.R's stewardship of the environment where he is considered by many to be the "environment president":

In 1887, Roosevelt and editor George Bird Grinnell of "Forest and Stream" magazine founded the Boone and Crockett Club. In the pages of his magazine, Grinnell had called for scientific forest management, clean water, and restricted use of natural resources-ideas considered quite radical by most Americans.

Perhaps none of the club's efforts was more significant than one of their earliest-the battle for Yellowstone. While Yellowstone had been officially designated a national park, the designation included no provision for its protection from commercial exploitation. When mining and railroad interests threatened to seriously damage the park, Boone and Crockett rose to the defense.

With editorials, speaking engagements, and furious lobbying among Washington's rich and powerful, the B & C succeeded. In 1894, President Grover Cleveland signed a bill protecting Yellowstone.


[...]

In March, 1903, Roosevelt visited Pelican Island in Florida, a nesting ground for numerous shorebirds. At the time, demand for plumes for women's hats had decimated shorebird populations, and Roosevelt was well aware of the danger of massive extinction. With the stroke of his presidential pen, Roosevelt created Pelican Island Bird Reservation. This was the first, but not by far the last, time Roosevelt would use such power. Before he left office, he would create 50 more such refuges.

[...]

Roosevelt established the federal Reclamation Service in 1902. The agency, through the use of dams and irrigation, created arable land in areas that had been too dry to farm. Eventually, the Reclamation Service brought millions of acres of farmland into service.

In 1905, Roosevelt created the Bureau of Forestry, with Gifford Pinchot as chief forester. Pinchot believed that timberlands should be managed scientifically, with selected trees harvested and others left to grow, so that rain would not cause excessive soil erosion, runoff, flooding, or water pollution.

Year by year, act by act, proclamation by proclamation, Roosevelt built his natural empire. In Alaska, he created the Tongass and the Chugach forest reserves. In Hawaii, he set several small islands aside as the Hawaiian Islands Bird Reservation. Everywhere, it seemed, TR added acreage. Mount Olympus in Washington State. Lake Malheur in Oregon. Culebra Island in Puerto Rico. Mosquito Inlet in Florida. And perhaps his greatest achievement-Grand Canyon National Monument in Arizona.

[...]
Under the auspices of the Antiquities Act, he signed the Grand Canyon National Monument into being on January 11, 1908. It was the 11th such monument he had created to date. He would create 18 in all, among them Montezuma Castle, Arizona; Gila Cliff Dwelling, New Mexico; Devil's Tower, Wyoming; and Muir Woods, California.

GOI: He understood that being a "conservative" meant CONSERVING the environment!! What an outrageous practice of "conservatism!!" How dare he conserve the environment for the public. What a socialist!!! Many modern day Conservatives are only interested in conserving things FOR THEMSELVES!!!

He went on to do many other things in the vein of the modern day Democratic platform such as:

-Trust busting
-Government regulation of industry
-He was considered one of the first progressives in America
-He was also known for being a champion of the "little man" over big business and fought the “malefactors of great wealth.”
-He secured the passage of the Elkins Act and the Hepburn Act for regulation of the railroads, the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act for consumer protection, and the Federal Employers' Liability Act for Labor.
-He established the United States Department of Commerce and Labor which among several missions works for the improving the living standards of all Americans.

So, we might all want to reconsider Teddy Roosevelt as a "Republican." In this light then I find it interesting that GWB considers T.R. to be one of his favorite presidents! They are though equals when it comes to imperialism:

December 6, 2004, marked the centennial of one of the landmark statements in U.S. foreign policy: Theodore Roosevelt’s so-called “Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine.” It was here, and not in the post-9/11 speeches of George W. Bush, that we first heard the rationalization for a pre-emptive imperialism coming from the White House.

---End of Transmission---

7 comments:

Julie O. said...

And remember, Bush says TR is his favorite president:
"Of course, the current president's reading of "TR" is rather selective. A passionate environmentalist and social progressive who built up big government to protect the public against the depredations of private capital, Roosevelt would no doubt find much to vigorously protest in Bush's policies."

james said...

Julie:

I agree that his reading of T.R. is very selective. Great quote.

Yeah being selective as a general rule seems to be Bush's M.O. He has selective hearing for sure.

See no evil, hear no evil, speak, speak no evil (o.k. well, he can speak evil...hehe).

Kvatch said...

GOI: I wonder though, would Teddy be a Republican in today's political arena? Take for example T.R's stewardship of the environment where he is considered by many to be the "environment president":

Probably not. Much in the same manner that Bush cannot really be a considered a conservative. Dude's a "spend and borrow" Republicrat--a new dealer for a new century.

james said...

Kvatch:

Yeah W isn't a Republican...he's a Neo-Con. However, the conservative part doesn't apply to him either.

He's more like a Neo-Fascist. And no, I'm not comparing him to Hitler in saying this. And no basic fascism does not involve hating Jews (that was Hitler's own twist on it).

The main tenets of fascism are:

-The corporate take-over of government.

-Hyper nationalism.

-Militarism.

-Anti-liberalism.

james said...

I forgot to add:

-Extreme nativism
-Extreme religious identity
-Military unilateralism
-Consentrated ownership of media

And I should more accurately say that W is more Neo-fascistic then full blown Fascist. Although he walks a fine line between the two.

SHEMP said...

If Roosevelt were alive today he certainly wouldn't be a democrat because today democrats are merely cowards who have been neutered by years of liberalism. At least Teddy had the balls to stand up for his beliefs regardless of political pressure from either side. "Speak softly and carry a big stick". Anyone remember that one? Basically negotiate with talk and then back it up with decisive military force. How about the fact that he was an avid hunter and owned many guns. Roosevelt did what he thought was best for the American citizens. Land and environmental conservation does not exclusively belong to democrats, just radical practices. As a matter of fact, when you get right down to it the conservatives are the ones who freed slaves and passed civil rights legislation of the 1960's(fought against feverishly by democrats). I don't agree with everything he did but at least he was honest with himself and the rest of America. The question had nothing to do with Bush but many of you still brought him up. You are all so blinded by your own hate that you can't even see that many of Bush's policies were directly in line with the Democrat platform. Parties should be dissolved altogether and candidates should rely on their own individual beliefs and merits but that is just one man's opinion.

Handsome B. Wonderful said...

Shemp:

You said:

If Roosevelt were alive today he certainly wouldn't be a democrat because today democrats are merely cowards who have been neutered by years of liberalism.Wow, great way to start a debate. Great argument calling people names. Do you convince many people to agree with you by insulting them? Especially right out of the gate?

This kind of argument is a throw away argument because I can turn around and call you any number of names too and the main question isn't addressed in the least. Thankfully for someone like me who likes to debate as an adult without name calling you wrote on...

You said:

At least Teddy had the balls to stand up for his beliefs regardless of political pressure from either side. "Speak softly and carry a big stick". Anyone remember that one? Basically negotiate with talk and then back it up with decisive military force.Of course Obama stands up for his beliefs. There are Democrats who oppose his health care ideas but he will push forward anyway. There were Dems who stood up against TARP but he went ahead anyway.

As for "walking softly and carrying a big stick" of course I remember it. I have a degree in history if you read my profile. Obama is the epitome of this doctrine.

He consistently mentioned on the campaign trail about using diplomacy again (walking softly) but being firm when needed. Thus, his decisions to be proactive in Afghanistan and send in more troops, which isn't popular with the more liberal politicians in Congress.

To use the example of your most recent president--Bush, he was terrible at "Walking softly." He blustered and postured all the time with his "Dead or alive" and "Mission Accomplished" bullshit. He shot first and asked questions later.

Just Obama saw Iraq as a hopeless war (like most Americans) doesn't mean that he's soft on defense or terrorism. It means he wisely chooses his battles. Walking softly and carrying a big stick.

You mentioned how Liberals aren't the only ones who are for conserving the environment and you're right. However, most environmentalists are Liberal. And T.R. widened park programs and restricted natural resource depletion, which many (not all but most) modern day Republicans wouldn't do. They want logging rights and oil rights in our national parks.

Roosevelt was an extremeenvironmentalist, which most Republicans aren't. Then you mention the fact that Teddy had guns and hunted but while most gun owners and hunters are probably Republican--not all are. Many Dems out here in the west where I live are very much into guns and hunting.

Of course there are positions that he might not share with all Democrats but we are a big tent party and welcome Democrats who are pro-gun and hunt. To say otherwise is to be dishonest.

As for civil rights Truman sought to integrate the military and embraced policies to protect minority rights in employment. Then, it was JFK who introduced the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

When the bill was introduced to the House, Emmanuel Celler (D) headed the committee, which strengthened the bill. And President Johnson (D) signed it into law. Johnson also pushed through the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Yes, many Dems went against it but they were over ruled in the end by the more progressive Dems. The Dems who opposed the Civil Rights act were Dems in name only at that point. They weren't keeping up with an increasingly progressive Democratic Party.

And in the end the Progressive Dems were the ones who signed it into law. Then those racist Dems who opposed the legislation went to the Republican Party. LBJ famously said that signing the Civil Rights bill would give the South to the GOP for a generation.

So why would anti-civil rights Dems in the South go to the Republicans if the Republicans stood for civil rights and desegregation?

This move by LBJ is a big reason the Republicans never get more than 5-10% of the Black vote. It's obvious to any objective person that the Dems over the years have been much more open to minorities than the Republicans.

If the GOP is the party who supports minorities then why do Blacks vote overwhelmingly for the Dems? And why do you oppose comprehensive immigration? And why do you oppose gay rights and why has the Dem Party been the one to champion women's rights?

You said:

You are all so blinded by your own hate that you can't even see that many of Bush's policies were directly in line with the Democrat platform.What policies were those? Give me some specifics. And what question are you referring that we all supposedly deviated from in bringing up Bush?

Julie O. mentioned Bush in the first comment but it was in relation to T.R. She was mentioning how it was odd that Bush mentioned T.R. as a hero since to her T.R. was more like a Dem.