Tag Archives: fdr

J. Edgar Hoover

I thoroughly enjoyed this book.  It covered so many aspects of U.S. history and filled in a lot of blanks for me about key characters.  Here are some random observations.

While the author tilts to the Left politically and clearly doesn’t like Hoover (and not without many good reasons), his thorough analysis can’t help but show the many foibles and evils of Democrats as well as Hoover and Republicans.  It was FDR that expanded Hoover’s powers greatly, and FDR, Kennedy and Johnson loved how Hoover provided them with gossip and blackmail material.  He also noted the vote-stealing of Kennedy and Johnson and the manufactured images of the Kennedy family.

Hoover provided irrefutable evidence of what a fraud the “Reverend” side of MLK was, but the media and politicians chose to ignore it.

He pretended for years that significant organized crime didn’t exist, perhaps because they had something on him and/or because the difficulty of the cases would impact his success rate for solving crimes.   But when it became public just how real it was and when Attorney General Robert Kennedy pushed him on it in the 1960’s , he went after it with a vengeance and made great progress.

All over the United States crime families discussed this sudden, astonishing turn of events—they were especially stunned to find that the FBI even knew the family infrastructure—and agreed there should be no recurrence. But mob leaders in Youngstown, Ohio, didn’t get the message. The agents overheard them discussing which of their three available hit men to use to kill an FBI agent they particularly disliked. Some twenty of the area’s biggest and baddestlooking agents barged into the Mafia chieftain’s penthouse apartment, “accidentally” knocked over expensive vases, dropped cigarettes and still-lit matches on the Oriental carpets, urinated on a favorite potted palm. “You may have three hit men,” they told him, “but Mr. Hoover has thousands.”54

After that, no one again referred to FBI agents on overhears as Boy Scouts.

But the Mafiosi didn’t blame FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who had left them alone for so many years. They were sure that he was only a reluctant warrior, acting on the orders of Attorney General Robert Kennedy.

He was also a racist who stood to the side on various KKK issues, but again, when finally pressed into action, he made great strides against the KKK.  Whether legal or not, actions like sending postcards to KKK members (that others were sure to read) noting how they were known members and such helped shame people into leaving the group.  The FBI would even send fake letters to spouses telling them that their KKK-member husbands were having affairs.  The idea was to distract them at home to keep them from terrorizing others.

Here’s an example of how they worked to pit the Communists and Mafia against each other:

In November the director [Hoover] informed selected SACs [Special Agends in Charge] about the Bureau’s inspiration for a Klanzi party COINTELPRO [COunter INtelligence PROgrams]: “We created the impression that the Klan and the American Nazi Party might form the Klanzi Party…for the purpose of ridicule and to provoke certain Klan leaders to an attack on the ANP.” A month before, someone suggested a rather similar plan to disrupt the Communist party and La Cosa Nostra by “having them expend their energies attacking each other.” A supposedly Communist leaflet attacking the working conditions at a mob-owned business was to be the first fruit of Operation Hoodwink.

If you ask most Lefties who the Vietnam war hawks were they would probably blame Republicans, but it was Kennedy and Johnson who drove it.

The un-checked power of someone who had the power to dig up dirt on everyone except Jesus made for a dangerous combination.  He could blackmail just about anyone, including Presidents.

It was interesting how many times homosexual issues came up in the book.  The government would screen for that, because it opened people to potential blackmail.  But what was interesting is that most of the evidence was from police records where individuals had been caught in parks, restrooms, etc.  What is it with that deviancy that leads people to such reckless behavior?

And then there were the “special requests,” as in November 1969 when H. R. Haldeman asked for a list of known or suspected homosexuals in the Washington press corps. Within hours, a detailed report was delivered to the White House, indicating that the FBI director had this particular information close at hand.

The author also noted that “Much has been made of Nixon’s “enemies list.” Every administration had had such a list.”

Sadly, Hoover spent so much time self-promoting and covering for the bureau that they could have accomplished much more.  They missed out on some important opportunities because of his foolish pride.  And he engaged in and allowed a lot of petty embezzlement while he should have set the best example.

The urban legend of Hoover being a cross-dresser wasn’t even noted.  I hate when those things seep into the public consciousness.  But the author frequently alluded to the potentially homosexual relationship of Hoover and his long-time (and also single) 2nd in command, Clyde Tolson, even though he never made a definitive conclusion.

 

It isn’t generosity when you give away the money of others

Most Liberals assume that they are more generous.  They come from Stereotype Land and read the script just like the media and entertainment complexes tell them to.  But studies show that by any measure — giving time, money or even blood donations — conservatives are more generous.  They just don’t lobby Caesar to “give” your money and count it as a good deed on their part.  See Who Really Cares.

And consider how these Liberal heroes want to take your money to “give” to others but can’t manage any real and significant giving themselves.  If Joe Biden, for example, can’t afford to give more than 0.2% over his roughly quarter-million dollar income (that is point-two percent, not two percent — only $369 per year), then how could he possibly afford to pay increased taxes?  Oh yeah, there will be loopholes for him and those who vote for the tax increase bills.

His 0.2% giving and the percentages below are even worse than they look because they are based on Adjusted Gross Income, which is typically much less than gross income.

The Palins gave over 10 times what Biden did, percentage-wise, though that was still just 2% in 2007 and 3.8% in 2006.  They donated much more money than the Bidens with only half the income.

Too bad the media didn’t lead with that story in 2008.

A truly inconvenient truth: Al & Tipper Gore donated $353 of their 1997 income of $197,729, or 0.18%.  That is a fraction of 1%.  I wonder if he’s making real donations now that he’s getting rich off the AGW fraud?

More Liberal Scrooges (read the whole article at the link – it is priceless).

Andrew Cuomo

Cuomo was a homeless advocate throughout the 1990s, but according to his own tax returns he made no charitable contributions between 1996 and 1999. In 2000 he donated a whopping $2,750. In 2004 and 2005, Cuomo had more than $1.5 million in adjusted gross income but gave a paltry $2,000 to charity.

Cuomo made no charitable contributions in 2003, when his income was a bit less than $300,000.

Barack Obama — wow, a whole percent!  Hope and change, baby.

Barack Obama has a rather poor track record when it comes to charitable contributions. He consistently gave 1 percent of his income to charity. In his most charitable year, 2005, he earned $1.7 million (two and a half times what George W. Bush earned) but gave about the same dollar amount as the President.

John Kerry

Senator John Kerry likewise has a poor record. In 1995 he gave zero to charity, but did spend $500,000 to buy a half stake in a seventeenth century painting. In 1993, he gave $175 to the needy.

Ted Kennedy, champion of the poor

Senator Ted Kennedy has clearly relished his role over the years as a liberal Robin Hood. He once told Al Hunt of the Wall Street Journal, “I come from an advantaged life, and I’ll be goddamned if I’m going to get re-elected to the U.S. Senate by taking food out of the mouths of needy children.” But this should not be confused with Senator Kennedy actually giving much money to needy children.

. . . With a net worth of more than $8 million in the early 1970s and an income of $461,444 from a series of family trusts, Senator Robin Hood gave barely 1 percent of his income to charity. The sum is about as much as Kennedy claimed as a write-off on his fifty-foot sailing sloop Curragh.

But the poverty pimps give loads, right?  Uh, not exactly:

Jesse Jackson has often claimed that he operates from a “liberal spirit of compassion and love” while conservatives are “heartless and uncaring toward the silent poor.” But according to his publicly-released tax returns, he regularly donates less than 1 percent to charity.

Not surprisingly, while the political ideology of conservatives isn’t driven by redistributing the wealth of others, they are far more generous.  Even FDR was a cheap giver:

This evidence of liberal hypocrisy is damning enough, but what really amazes is how poorly these liberals do in comparison to so-called “heartless conservatives.” President Ronald Reagan, for instance, was often called heartless and callous by liberals. Unlike Roosevelt or JFK, Reagan was not a wealthy man when he became president. He had no family trust or investment portfolio to fall back on.

And yet, according to his tax returns, Reagan donated more than four times more to charity — both in terms of actual money and on a percentage basis — than Senator Ted Kennedy. And he gave more to charities with less income than FDR did. In 1985, for example, he gave away 6 percent of his income.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have continued this Reagan record. During the early 1990s, George W. Bush regularly gave away more than 10 percent of his income. In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney gave away 77 percent of his income to charity. He was actually criticized by some liberal bloggers for this, who claimed he was getting too much of a tax deduction.

These Liberal leaders preach about generosity but they are hypocrites and fakes.  They want to take from neighbor A to give to neighbor B — while taking their commission, of course — and consider it charity on their part.  And they have plenty of confused and/or fake religious folks helping them, including the Methodist leader who thinks the proposed health care bill — which includes taxpayer-funded abortions — is in the spirit of the Good Samaritan.

Save this link to show those who claim that Liberal leaders really care about others.

Hat tip: The Sisyphus Files

Roundup

pro-choice-baby.jpgFrom the “I am not making this up” department: Planned Parenthood offers gift certificates, just in time for Christmas.

P.S. Did you know that Planned Parenthood used to be “anti-choice” because they knew that abortion killed a baby and was bad for the mother?  From their own advertisement:

Is it [birth control] an abortion?

Definitely not.  An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.  It is dangerous to your life and health.  It may make you sterile so that when you want a child you cannot have it.  Birth control merely postpones the meaning of life.

Musings from a Theo-Geek has a good piece on Why Secular Psychology and Christianity Don’t Mix

 —

Long depression was FDR’s fault – Be skeptical and even nervous about all the “solutions” being bandied about today.

Ten reasons not to ask Jesus into your heart – tips on avoiding false conversions

Serbian abortionist becomes pro-lifer after 48,000 abortions – I hope our leaders who are pro-choice have the same dreams that this guy did.