Democrat Hero FDR Was In Fact A Wicked Man Who Is Burning In Hell With The Blood Of Hundreds Of Thousands Of Innocent Holocaust Jews On His Hands

I had my view of Franklin Delano Roosevelt radically changed by my reading of the Burton Folsom Jr. book, New Deal Or Raw Deal? How FDR’s Economic Legacy Has Damaged America.  I challenge anyone who adores FDR to read that thoroughly documented work.  Another book to read is Amity Schlaes’ The Forgotten Man.  You end up being incredibly angry and deeply saddened at the same time as a foolish American people wickedly kept returning to the policies of a wicked man who trapped America into the misery of a terrible depression that lasted fully seven years longer than it should have.

We also find that he may have – at least if you believe in a just and righteous God – kept America trapped in a bloody world war that resulted in the deaths of over 400,000 Americans.

If you believe in God – as I do – I think it is a valid assertion that God would have given America swift victory had we tried to help God’s people the Jews instead of what we did under a despicable and callous FDR.

We know that FDR was a racist bigot who detested black people and allowed labor unions to exclude blacks from work that they desperately needed to survive the darkest days of America.

The question as to why black people have in recent years chosen to celebrate and support the party that put their ancestors in the chains of slavery, fought a vicious Civil War to keep them in those chains, invented the Ku Klux Klan as the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party to keep blacks who had been freed by Republicans in subjugation, resegregated blacks under the tyranny of “the father of the modern progressive movement” also known as the racist white supremacist Woodrow Wilson, was still so racist in 1924 that the Democratic National Convention of that year was called “Klanbake,” allowed black men to go untreated with syphilis so researchers could study the progression of the disease (the Tuskegee Experiment) throughout the entire FDR presidency, was largely THE party of racist discrimination through the 1950s, and then only passed the Civil Rights laws with the overwhelming supporting votes of Republicans, is a mystery that I will not attempt to explain.  I have no idea why black people as a culture allowed Democrats who had subjected them to one form of plantation allowed Democrats to bait and switch them into a different form of plantation (the welfare plantation of institutional generational dependency).

I will only point out that after reading about the incredible harm a wicked and cynical president did to the American economy out of bitter partisan ideology, I believed that FDR is burning in hell today.

Now, having read this piece by an expert on the Holocaust, I am certain of it (this piece was originally filed under the LA Times title, “FDR’s troubling view of Jews”):

What FDR said about Jews in private
His personal sentiments about Jews may help explain America’s tepid response to the Holocaust.
By Rafael Medoff
April 7, 2013

In May 1943, President Franklin Roosevelt met with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill at the White House. It was 17 months after Pearl Harbor and a little more than a year before D-Day. The two Allied leaders reviewed the war effort to date and exchanged thoughts on their plans for the postwar era. At one point in the discussion, FDR offered what he called “the best way to settle the Jewish question.”

Vice President Henry Wallace, who noted the conversation in his diary, said Roosevelt spoke approvingly of a plan (recommended by geographer and Johns Hopkins University President Isaiah Bowman) “to spread the Jews thin all over the world.” The diary entry adds: “The president said he had tried this out in [Meriwether] County, Georgia [where Roosevelt lived in the 1920s] and at Hyde Park on the basis of adding four or five Jewish families at each place. He claimed that the local population would have no objection if there were no more than that.”

Roosevelt’s “best way” remark is condescending and distasteful, and coming from anyone else it would probably be regarded as anti-Semitism. But more than that, FDR’s support for “spreading the Jews thin” may hold the key to understanding a subject that has been at the center of controversy for decades: the American government’s tepid response to the Holocaust.

Here’s the paradox. The U.S. immigration system severely limited the number of German Jews admitted during the Nazi years to about 26,000 annually — but even that quota was less than 25% filled during most of the Hitler era, because the Roosevelt administration piled on so many extra requirements for would-be immigrants. For example, starting in 1941, merely leaving behind a close relative in Europe would be enough to disqualify an applicant — on the absurd assumption that the Nazis could threaten the relative and thereby force the immigrant into spying for Hitler.

Why did the administration actively seek to discourage and disqualify Jewish refugees from coming to the United States? Why didn’t the president quietly tell his State Department (which administered the immigration system) to fill the quotas for Germany and Axis-occupied countries to the legal limit? That alone could have saved 190,000 lives. It would not have required a fight with Congress or the anti-immigration forces; it would have involved minimal political risk to the president.

Every president’s policy decisions are shaped by a variety of factors, some political, some personal. In Roosevelt’s case, a pattern of private remarks about Jews, some of which I recently discovered at the Central Zionist Archives in Jerusalem and from other sources, may be significant.

In 1923, as a member of the Harvard board of directors, Roosevelt decided there were too many Jewish students at the college and helped institute a quota to limit the number admitted. In 1938, he privately suggested that Jews in Poland were dominating the economy and were therefore to blame for provoking anti-Semitism there. In 1941, he remarked at a Cabinet meeting that there were too many Jews among federal employees in Oregon. In 1943, he told government officials in Allied-liberated North Africa that the number of local Jews in various professions “should be definitely limited” so as to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.”

There is evidence of other troubling private remarks by FDR too, including dismissing pleas for Jewish refugees as “Jewish wailing” and “sob stuff”; expressing (to a senator ) his pride that “there is no Jewish blood in our veins”; and characterizing a tax maneuver by a Jewish newspaper publisher as “a dirty Jewish trick.” But the most common theme in Roosevelt’s private statements about Jews has to do with his perception that they were “overcrowding” many professions and exercising undue influence.

This attitude dovetails with what is known about FDR’s views regarding immigrants in general and Asian immigrants in particular.

In one 1920 interview, he complained about immigrants “crowding” into the cities and said “the remedy for this should be the distribution of aliens in various parts of the country.” In a series of articles for the Macon (Ga.) Daily Telegraph and for Asia magazine in the 1920s, he warned against granting citizenship to “non-assimilable immigrants” and opposed Japanese immigration on the grounds that “mingling Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results.” He recommended that future immigration should be limited to those who had “blood of the right sort.”

FDR’s decision to imprison thousands of Japanese Americans in internment camps during World War II was consistent with his perception of Asians as having innate racial characteristics that made them untrustworthy. Likewise, he apparently viewed with disdain what he seemed to regard as the innate characteristics of Jews. Admitting significant numbers of Jewish or Asian immigrants did not fit comfortably in FDR’s vision of America.

Other U.S. presidents have made their share of unfriendly remarks about Jews. A diary kept by Harry Truman included statements such as “The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish.” Richard Nixon’s denunciations of Jews as “very aggressive and obnoxious” were belatedly revealed in tapes of Oval Office conversations.

But the revelation of Franklin Roosevelt’s sentiments will probably shock many people. After all, he led America in the war against Hitler. Moreover, Roosevelt’s public persona is anchored in his image as a liberal humanitarian, his claim to care about “the forgotten man,” the downtrodden, the mistreated. But none of that can change the record of his response to the Holocaust.

The observance of Holocaust Memorial Day begins Sunday night. It is the annual occasion to reflect on the Nazi genocide and the world’s response to it. In the case of the United States, it is sobering to consider that partly because of Roosevelt’s private prejudices, innocent people who could have been saved were instead abandoned.

Rafael Medoff is the founding director of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies in Washington. His latest book is “FDR and the Holocaust: A Breach of Faith.”Medoff will speak Sunday at the Holocaust Memorial Day service at the Alpert Jewish Community Center in Long Beach.

I’m sorry.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt was different from Adolf Hitler HOW, exactly?  Certainly not in their vile racism or their contempt for Jews.

FDR has the documented blood of an ABSOLUTE MINIMUM of 190,000 Jews on his hands.  And given that he should have done far, far more than the “absolute minimum” to help desperate people who were condemned to miserable deaths because he wouldn’t lift a finger to help them, that number of Jews whose blood FDR has on his hands soars much the way Obama’s debt has soared.

FDR wanted to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.”  The rat bastard son of a bitch actually AGREED WITH HITLER!!!

That’s one of the reasons every single American should be nauseated by this image that celebrated both the wicked Obama and his wicked predecessor in massive socialism and rabid anti-Semitism:

Obama-FDR-New-New-Deal

At the heart of the Democrat Party is a profound hatred for God, for the Judeo-Christian worldview and for the people – both Jew and Christian alike – who follow the Word of God.

At last year’s Democrat Party National Convention, they removed “God” AND Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  The Democrat Party then illegally put them back in not because they didn’t despise God and a Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, but because of the political embarrassment they had caused themselves by being too honest with their hatred of the God of the Bible.

This is God damn America.  And we’re going to reap the same godless disaster this time around that we faced the last time.  Only this time – given the fact that this nation is more depraved than ever before – we are going to lose and lose big and lose everything.

And then Democrats will lead America into the worship of the Antichrist and the acceptance of the mark of the beast.  Because that is the hellish abyss they have been pushing America toward for decades.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

6 Responses to “Democrat Hero FDR Was In Fact A Wicked Man Who Is Burning In Hell With The Blood Of Hundreds Of Thousands Of Innocent Holocaust Jews On His Hands”

  1. Dog Walker Says:

    Some years ago, back before I was a Republican, I used to work for a guy that was always slamming on FDR. At the time I didn’t really get it or care. Of course this boss was a generation or two older than me so he could relate closer to it than I could.

    Along comes Bill Richardson. The guy I worked for owned a fueling outfit at the airport. Richardson used to come park at our facility, then I would give him a ride to the terminal. Being the fueler, and these being days before anything like the security we got now, I could get him in the gate from the ramp side.

    That way he didn’t have to go through the crowds at ticketing or run through the process like a proletarian. You know, having to put up with people asking him, “hey, you look familiar. Aren’t you somebody I ‘seen on TV or something.

    Anyway, one time Richardson and I had a disagreement. I was making him wait because I was taking care of “paying” customers. Richardson never bought nothing from us. Far as I could tell he was pure tax collector. I must have told him as much when he was grousing at me for making him wait. Sometimes I am not particularly polite. Usually I do ok with paying customers though.

    So I gets called on the carpet the next day. My boss tells me that he got a call from Richardson and that he complained about being treated rudely. I am all like “hey, he ain’t no paying customer. He is just a mooch.”

    My boss says, “good thing for you I am a Republican.”

    So back in the day before I could tolerate politics or current events or history, I became a Republican.

    All because I met a “man of the people” who more or less fancied himself an aristocrat or elitist or some damn thing.

  2. Dog Walker Says:

    FDR gave us Social Security. According to a bumper sticker I have seen, we should be grateful to Democrats for getting that for us.

    So I paid SS all of my life, except for maybe when I was a paperboy or a dishwasher in grade school and highschool. My dad was a hardcore Democrat and supporter of SS.

    Social Security is the tax I pay to ensure that the elderly have a stipend to live on should the economy collapse. See an economic collapse is one thing when you are a kid. You just keep working, get more money. Starting over when you are 60 or 70 ain’t no fun. You are better off dead.

    One of the images from the depression was the hobo camps or shanty towns. Apparently it was the stuff of third world poverty and apparently the camps were about half full of elderly. And we ain’t talking about folks that spent their lives on the mooch. We are talking guys that lost their life savings to bank failures.

    I still defend Social Security like a Democrat mostly because I paid it all my life. Paying it preempts peoples’ ability to save or invest in other venues. Of course those other venues are always vulnerable to ruinous market conditions. Re market collapse of 2008. Many people lost half of their investment.

    I used to go to the library to use their computer and internet cuz I was too cheap to buy internet at home. I seen some desperate guys there selling their nest egg at 50 cents on the dollar. And that’s before taxes and early withdrawal penalty. All of that for a last ditch effort to get a mortgage payment… for a house they ended up losing anyway.

    But for all that, what really gripes me is public sector workers, really Democrats, that “excuse” themselves from “participating” in Social Security.

    These are the guys who live with their lips locked onto our “spigots.” They get wages and benefits that exceed anything in the private sector.

    They get to double dip. You know, once the retire after putting in an “arduous” twenty years, they can collect their retirement pay while staying on the job. Try doing that in the private sector. Try doing that on Social Security.

    So these guys get to lavish themselves. Their hands snake across the table and grab the choicest morsels off of grandma and grandpa’s plates.

    Then they tell them that they should be grateful for their Social Security because they invented it.

  3. Michael Eden Says:

    So I gets called on the carpet the next day. My boss tells me that he got a call from Richardson and that he complained about being treated rudely. I am all like “hey, he ain’t no paying customer. He is just a mooch.”

    My boss says, “good thing for you I am a Republican.”

    Dog Walker,

    That’s not a bad story about how you became a Republican. Not at all.

    Democrats are as a species exactly like the roach you describe. They are “entitled.” And if they don’t get what they are “entitled” to – and of course NEVER pay for themselves – they will find a way to attack the actual working guy.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    Dog Walker,

    The problem with Social Security isn’t the notion of providing a pathway to support the elderly in their old age.

    It never was.

    The problem was the way it was done: a giant takeover by the federal government, which, as usual, made all kinds of promises (such as “the lockbox”) that all turned out to be lies.

    A DEMOCRAT Senator had a rival privatized plan that would have paid FAR more benefits – and actually BEEN paid for – than FDR’s Social Security. FDR destroyed him and forced his government takeover through.

    Now it’s going to collapse like the giant Ponzi scheme it always was.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    “My child, you will not hesitate in revealing the knowledge of truth. Teilhard de Chardin is in hell! Your leader, Roosevelt, is in hell! Franklin Roosevelt, My child. His spirit is one of darkness. He enters anew upon earth from the abyss.” – Our Lady, September 13, 1975

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    FDR was a leader in the movement to replace God with Government and to impose the separation of God from America in the form of his invented “separation of Church and state.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: