DUmmies discuss President Truman

[Ralph Wiggum]

Dpm12 (377 posts)

Your thoughts on Harry S Truman


I just read that he left office with a 28% approval rating and that his lowest Gallup rating of 22% recorded in March 1952 is the lowest ever recorded in the history of the poll (Richard Nixon's lowest was 24% in August 1974, Shrub's was lowest was 25% in October 2008, Carter had only 28% in June 1979, and Papa Bush had 29% in February 1992). I can't see what was so bad about him. The Korea War was kind of out of control and slightly unnecessary but other than that, I really can't think of anything bad about the guy. Your thoughts?

Th1onein (7,204 posts)
1. I don't like Truman because he dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

But, at the risk of getting the whole DU/Hiroshima thing going again, I'll leave it at that.

MineralMan (58,536 posts)
6. FDR oversaw the development of the nuclear weapons that

were used in Japan. Had he not died, he would have given the order himself. In actual fact, Truman did not even know about the project until FDR died and he was briefed on them.

The nuclear weapons were FDR's project, and he would have used them on Germany, had not the war in Europe ended. There is no doubt that he would have used them in Japan.

Those are the facts.

Blind squirrel found a acorn.

Downwinder (8,393 posts)
2. He created the CIA.

Submitted without comment.  I consider that a good thing.

el_bryanto (4,709 posts)
3. Truman has a lot to recommend him

But he was a mid-west conservative democrat, foisted on FDR in his last election. And, as noted above, he approved of the use of Atomic Bombs on Japan. So a mixed record at best.

Bryant

You are an idiot, sir.

Journeyman (9,516 posts)
5. He could have done something about HUAC & McCarthyism, but instead he helped feed the fear. . .

with the institution of "loyalty boards" and acquiescence to the persecution of many solid citizens.

He led us into the conflict in Korea, arguably one of the least popular wars in our nation's history, an intervention both costly and mindlessly bloody.

He launched the "Cold War," another costly, unnecessary policy, the impact of which continues to reverberate through our society to this day.

There were many good things he accomplished, and he showed himself to be a very determined and steady hand. History seems to be treating him more fairly than his contemporaries did, but there's no denying he instituted many highly unfavorable policies and showed himself to be spineless almost as often as he exhibited great courage.

 

[Ptarmigan]

Journeyman (9,516 posts)
5. He could have done something about HUAC & McCarthyism, but instead he helped feed the fear. . .

with the institution of "loyalty boards" and acquiescence to the persecution of many solid citizens.

He led us into the conflict in Korea, arguably one of the least popular wars in our nation's history, an intervention both costly and mindlessly bloody.

He launched the "Cold War," another costly, unnecessary policy, the impact of which continues to reverberate through our society to this day.

There were many good things he accomplished, and he showed himself to be a very determined and steady hand. History seems to be treating him more fairly than his contemporaries did, but there's no denying he instituted many highly unfavorable policies and showed himself to be spineless almost as often as he exhibited great courage.

Such ignorance. HUAC and Joe McCarthy went after commies and many were Democrats. President Harry Truman was in trouble as a result.

[dane]

One of my previous DU incarnations got into a couple of Truman threads.

The DUmmies always seemed surprised when they were told that the first US military advisors were sent to Viet Nam by the Truman administration, AND that for the last two years of the French involvement there, the US was paying about 80% of the French war expense in Viet Nam.

[JakeStyle]

MineralMan's avatar creeps me out.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Chronic post-WW2 shortages and a perceived FUBAR in Korea (Not necessarily incorrectly, particularly on the MacArthur debacle), as well as generally coming across as an autocratic little jerk who was also a DC outsider pretty well meant he was totally out of political allies by the election time in 1952...much like LBJ 16 years later, except he was an autocratic big jerk with a dash of psycho thrown into the mix.

[Delmar]

Thu Oct 31, 2013, 01:10 PM
Dpm12 (381 posts)

Your thoughts on Harry S Truman


I just read that he left office with a 28% approval rating and that his lowest Gallup rating of 22% recorded in March 1952 is the lowest ever recorded in the history of the poll (Richard Nixon's lowest was 24% in August 1974, Shrub's was lowest was 25% in October 2008, Carter had only 28% in June 1979, and Papa Bush had 29% in February 1992). I can't see what was so bad about him. The Korea War was kind of out of control and slightly unnecessary but other than that, I really can't think of anything bad about the guy. Your thoughts?

The DUmmies usually have their ears pricked up for any indication of racism.  I'm surprised that none of them mentioned that the failed haberdasher Truman was a virulent racist.

In his book Confessions of a White House Ghostwriter, James Humes, a speech writer for five U.S. presidents, relates a little-known but highly revealing story that was told to him by the television producer David Susskind, who worked on a documentary with Truman several years after the latter left office. “Susskind,” writes Humes, “said that each morning…he would arrive at Truman’s house at Independence. He would wait on the porch on a cold February day while Mrs. Truman went to inform her husband of his arrival. After about the fourth morning, he asked the president in his walk why he was never asked inside. ” “You’re a Jew, David,” Truman replied, “and no Jew has ever been in the house.” ” According to Humes, Truman went on to explain to a stunned Susskind that the house was his wife’s: “Bess runs it, and there’s never been a Jew inside the house in her or her mother’s lifetime.

Read more at: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/media-monitor/just-wild-about-harry/2003/08/13/

[jukin]

When the Duches really see what the muslim marxist has done to healthcare they will turn on him just like Truman.

[franksolich]

Chronic post-WW2 shortages and a perceived FUBAR in Korea (Not necessarily incorrectly, particularly on the MacArthur debacle), as well as generally coming across as an autocratic little jerk who was also a DC outsider pretty well meant he was totally out of political allies by the election time in 1952...much like LBJ 16 years later, except he was an autocratic big jerk with a dash of psycho thrown into the mix.

Also, widespread corruption, oddly from the administration of a man who'd been in charge of investigating corruption, waste, and fraud in wartime contracts a few years earlier.

In 1950, the Senate, led by Estes Kefauver, investigated numerous charges of corruption among senior administration officials, some of whom received fur coats and deep freezers in exchange for favors. A large number of employees of the Internal Revenue Bureau (today the IRS) were accepting bribes; 166 employees either resigned or were fired in 1950, with many soon facing indictment. When Attorney General J. Howard McGrath fired the special prosecutor in early 1952 for being too zealous, Truman fired McGrath. Truman submitted a reorganization plan to reform the IRB; Congress passed it, but the corruption was a major issue in the 1952 presidential election.

People were just sick and tired of corruption; one wishes we were the same today.