1 - 10 Next
Two of FDR's ambassorial appointments in the 1930s are interesting in this context. In those days, career foreign service men, independently wealthy, were typically appointed. In 1933, close on the heels of Hitler being elected Chancellor, none of RDR's initial choices were interested in being ambassador to Germany, or better put, to all but formally Nazi Germany. As outlined in Erik Larson's In the Garden of Beasts, FDR appoints an obscure Univ. of Chicago History Professor, William Doddwho accepts the job, believing that he'll have plenty of time to complete the book he's been working on. He takes his wife and two grown children with him. He is not wealthy, the State Department, in those days does not pay for or reimburse ambassadors for the expense of entertaining, expected of them. The reality of the unfolding horrors of the Nazi Regime become obvious almost immediately. Another appointment by FDR was truly strategic, that of John Gilbert Winant, former two-term and extremely popular governor of New Hampshire and, most recently, head of the new Social Security Administration, to succede Joe Kennedy as Ambassador to the Court of St. James/Britian. The year was 1939, Europe was on the brink of war and the US was still solidly isolationist and mired in the Depression. Both appointments were Republican, neither had any experience in politics or international affairs and were both of modest, but professional means.
In response to:

The Collapse of Leadership

johncorn Wrote: Apr 18, 2013 6:41 PM
the universal characteristic of criminals is they break laws. There is no law they won't break if it interferes with pursuit of their crime. Registering their cars or their guns is no different. That's why they steal cars so they can't be traced. The new laws proposed will not stop a single criminal act nor one by a mentally deranged person. The anti-gun movement is inherently political to remove guns from the law abiding, not the law breaking or the mentally disturbed population. Proof is the gun violence in the jurisdictions with the harshest gun control laws in the country and the world: Chicago, New York City, DC and Connecticut. Abroad, England, Norway and Germany, to name a few.
If you want to refute "dumb," you might want to learn the definition of "impound." It has nothing to do with stealing. I'm sorry if you don't know the meaning of "refute" or "definition."
In response to:

Clarifying America's Gun Culture

johncorn Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 10:03 AM
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to follow any of Hitler's advice.
In response to:


johncorn Wrote: Oct 24, 2012 12:01 PM
O'Reilly knows next to nothing about economics. Look at his history of rants about blaming speculators for the rise in oil prices. At the end of the day, he's a very rude bomb thrower. I grit my teeth when watching him, which I do, as he gets some interesting guests, because of his top-flight ratings.
What a crock of vacuous, destructive or worthless nonsense.
In response to:

Mitt Romney, Big-Government Man

johncorn Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 1:04 PM
John, I love you, but get real! NO regulation? Are you promoting anarchy, to be a purist? Won't work and if you don't acknowledge that, you've lost my respect.
Both Obamas are totalitarian, at heart. There's no relief in sight until they're out of sight.
Outstanding memo, Hugh. You make a case so strong that one can't be smart if he doesn't buy in.
In response to:

Obama’s Goose Is Cooked

johncorn Wrote: Jul 07, 2012 11:36 AM
"Very" reelectable? You need to spend some time (a couple of minutes will do it) in checking out, a. the dreadful economy, jobs stagnation and debt/deficit picture; b. his foreign policy, of alienating allies, cozying up to dictators and lacking any hint of leadership in the Middle East. Let's not forget his disrespect for the military, his offensive attitude of appeasement. That should do it for starters.
1 - 10 Next