Herbert Hoover, Barack Obama and a Banana Republic

As of Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Less than two years under President Barack Obama's leadership, America is emerging from the serious financial crisis begun under President Bush.

Voters will soon decide if Obama's prescriptions for economic recovery justify staying the course or if America should shift 180 degrees to alternative GOP solutions contained in the Republicans' "Pledge to America."

The pledge is basically a rehash of failed Bush policies, which allowed rampant Wall Street abuses, promoted a rush to a needless war and produced a damaging recession.

The Republican pledge, according to Nobel laureate and respected economist Paul Krugman, makes permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, thus "adding $3.7 trillion to the federal debt over the next decade." Krugman says the GOP position is: "Deficits are a terrible thing. Let's make them much bigger."

Today's nasty political climate reminds one of 1932, when more than 10,000 banks failed, unemployment reached 25 percent and GDP fell almost 50 percent. President Herbert Hoover, campaigning for a second term, was met by hostile crowds and threats on his life. Eggs and rotten fruit were thrown at him by disgruntled Americans whose rage was not unlike that of 2010's often raucous tea party members and addled birthers.

Hoover stubbornly rejected direct federal relief to individuals, believing that a dole would be "addictive and reduce the incentive to work," a view still fervently held by many conservatives and tea partiers seemingly bent on shanghaiing the unpopular GOP.

Hoover's prescriptions included: volunteerism, reliance on local charity, protective tariffs, limited federal regulation of the nation's economic system, and forced migration of 500,000 Mexicans, deemed usurpers of American jobs. Thousands of homeless Americans were forced into squalid shantytowns called "Hoovervilles," and soup kitchens became commonplace.

Hoover lost re-election. Voters concluded that he lacked creative solutions to defeat the Great Depression and that he didn't "feel their pain."

Ironically, only four years earlier, the majority opinion was that no American was better prepared and qualified to be the 31st president than Herbert Clark Hoover: a self-made man, an orphan who graduated from Stanford University, an incredibly successful mining engineer and executive, a great humanitarian and administrator who led successful Belgian relief efforts during World War I, and an enlightened secretary of commerce under Harding and Coolidge.

Hoover espoused the Efficiency Movement, believing the economy and government were riddled with waste that could be eliminated by experts who'd identify the problems and solve them. Two decades later, President Harry Truman, an admirer of the long-vilified Hoover, invited him to head a commission to streamline the government, which he gladly did.

Hoover carried only six states in 1932, losing to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who'd attacked him during the campaign for his "reckless and extravagant spending" and his belief that "we ought to control everything in Washington as rapidly as possible." FDR's running mate, John Nance Garner, accused the GOP of "leading the country down the path of socialism." Sound like something you'd hear on FOX?

Once elected, FDR's "Brain Trust" proposed bold Keynesian economic measures aimed at putting people back to work. His chief adviser, Rexford Tugwell, observed after the Depression subsided that many New Deal innovations were actually good ideas considered but rejected by the usually progressive Hoover.

FDR's Social Security legislation stands as the hallmark of his administration. In 2010, the GOP, which vigorously opposed Social Security in 1935, now promises to privatize it.

Hoover asked Americans to patiently trust his "tried and true" conservative remedies. The electorate didn't buy it. In the approaching 2010 midterm elections, fearful citizens may deny the Obama administration a vote of confidence.

Should voters realistically expect the reactionary "Party of No" to be any more creative and successful than Herbert Hoover? I think not. Paul Krugman predicts "Republicans may gain just enough power to make the country ungovernable, unable to address its fiscal problems or anything else in a serious way ... a banana republic, here we come."

Paul R. Dunn lives in Pinehurst. Contact him at paulandbj@nc.rr. com.

More like this story

GeorgiaMan 2 years, 7 months ago

I can only say one thing about this piece - What?

This piece sounds like it was thrown together in a blender and spit out by a camel. Comparing things that have no connection with one another.
Taking this history lesson is like reading a book through its cover. Please if you read this column and this comment go back and check all of the half facts and half truths in it. This ignorance of history is why we are doomed to repeat it.

None 2 years, 7 months ago

And what are your facts Georgiaman? Like most so called conservatives' you throw an opinion out there as if nothing you've said is more than half facts or half truths.

It's likened to the Richard Burr ad where three people are discussing the 14 trillion dollar deficit. Are they saying that during the current administration this nation has accrued 14 trillion in debt? Misleading perhaps - indeed it is! More political sidestepping, when in fact 12 trillion was a direct result of two wars under the Bush Administration and another trillion for TARP funds to cover Wall Street mismanagement - by the way, TARP bailout began before Obama was sworn-in. Or are the misaligned Bush administrations' financial and economic misdeeds a segway to the Obama Administration no longer of an importance? Continuing tax breaks for the 2% only fortifies their management portfolios - their only investment in our economy – not income producing jobs!

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

A recent article on the website Political Animal makes an excellent point:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_10/026056.php

"Honestly, I'm not sure what it is Republicans think they're whining about. The economy is clearly still struggling, but we'd be far better off if the GOP weren't already getting its way.

Putting aside everything we know about the status quo, consider exactly what Republicans think we should be doing right now: keep Bush-era tax rates; slash public-sector employment; stop infrastructure investments; let the private sector grow without any additional economic stimulus.

Then consider the status quo: we have Bush-era tax rates in place (in addition to middle-class and small-business tax cuts Dems passed over GOP opposition); the public sector is shedding jobs by tens of thousands of people per month; infrastructure investments are being blocked (see here and here); and the private sector is trying to grow without any additional economic stimulus.

In other words, the GOP is getting its way and it's complaining about the results.

It's like we're having a debate in a bad "Twilight Zone" episode. Every measure that's come up over the last 21 months that could help create jobs has been fought, watered down, and sometimes killed by Republicans ... who in turn believe the weak job landscape, which they created in the first place, is Democrats' fault. And Americans, feeling pain and anxiety, actually seem inclined to believe them."

Zoey 2 years, 7 months ago

Has anyone noticed the strange happenings with the comment section ?

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

You'll have to be more specific than that, Zoey :-).

Zoey 2 years, 7 months ago

82soldier,

Yes this place is confusing, I jump the gun and presumed Prometheus and jimt were banned. I had a great speech already composed. I think I'll post it anyway to reflect a comical approach to the Pilots actions and my own for assuming....

Zoey 2 years, 7 months ago

I'm new to the comment sections, but has anyone else noticed that we

have lost two of our largest contributors to the comment section,

Prometheus and jimt ? Their ongoing arguments and rebuttals have led to

great post that are very educational, thought provoking, and often

comical comments collectively from the comment section as a whole.

The Pilot has erased "seemingly all" of their comments. Now, if you

read though the comments section in which they posted, it appears like

a bunch of illegible, non-pertinent mumbo-jumbo. Why would the Pilot

choose to resort to these childish and harsh tactics ? It makes me

question the Pilots own morals, ethics, and conduct policies...

Did aliens abduct Prometheus and jimt ? Were their free-thinkings

needed for a far away social experiment ? Were they taken to a hospital

for a lobotomy ? (to return with a docile attitude towards the Pilots

policies). Were they banned until the November elections are over ?

(not to help swing voters left or right.) Were they banned pemanently

? (A real lose)...

My condolences go out to the families of Prometheus and jimt. I pray

for their safe return to the comment sections. (minus any apparent bore

holes or terrifying experiences) They are Truly Missed...

In Commemoration, I post this here in a political comment section,

where they both seemed to feel right at home....

  “I do not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to

the death your right to say it” Voltaire

OldPilot 2 years, 7 months ago

Good article Mr. Dunn!

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

"and of course Prom's comments have all vanished and dusty Rhoades foul mouth marches on, So much for a fair open public forum."

Typical conservative crybaby, hollerin' when he hasn't been hurt.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

Sorry, 82soldier but you're the one just made a fool of yourself by whining about posts taken off when no such thing happened. Lashing out at me won't make that any less true.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

Poor thing. Just can't get a fair shake from those meanies at the Pilot.

Zoey 2 years, 7 months ago

yes, Prometheus' "double agent" reference has vanished. Seems to be a Epidemic..Either there's a glitch in the software that's randomly deleting post or someone has a short fuse...

None 2 years, 7 months ago

Prometheus says..."That is factually incorrect:" Lets try to put this into perspective...Clinton left a surplus...

Depending on which website one visits...

After 8 years of Bush according to your assessment: CBO numbers through 2019 place the "Iraq war" cost at $809.4 billion

CBO numbers through 2019 place the "stimulus" cost $820 billion

And we nine years away from those numbers....

So are you inferring that in 22 months the Obama administration has assessed a 14 trillion dollar deficit? You're looking at the wrong website and creative numbers....

Try this link showing an actual counter: http://costofwar.com/

Somehow between Clinton and Obama our legislators spent 14 trillion dollars. I am certain there is enough blame to go around on both sides of the isle. Like a bridge to no-where in Alaska!

Or millions for an airport with only 1 flight per year....So if the large numbers didn't happen on Bushs' watch, where did the deficit originate?

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

I occasionally have posts disappear for no reason I can fathom. I tend to put it down to technical glitches, like the one that makes me have to sign in over and over before I can finally post. The fact is, this site has serious technical issues and when things go wrong, that's what I think of first.

But then, I'm not a paranoid wingnut who blames everything they don't like on some sort of liberal conspiracy.

dustyrhoades 2 years, 7 months ago

Here's how it works as far as I can tell: if your post is removed for violation of the TOS, you get a note to that effect replacing the post. When you're banned (like stevital and taxed2death), you disappear, entirely. All your posts are gone.

blake 2 years, 7 months ago

Toda, you have your numbers completely wrong. Bush accrued 4T in national debt---very large by any standard. Obama is on track to dwarf his record. You are confusing budget deficit and national debt.

blake 2 years, 7 months ago

Sorry, correction: GWB grew the debt by $4.9T. When he left the debt was $10.6T. We now stand at $13.6T.

moonchild7 2 years, 7 months ago

I was reading thru my own comments and noticed that I had a comment "removed" and haven't a clue as to what I said that was so bad. I do tend to take the left" side of an argument and try to "watch" my language so I am puzzled.

We are nearing another election and so many of the messages are distorted, fraudulent or out right lies. I am not going to attach the source's you can easily find them but most importantly is the fact that under REAGAN, BUSH SR, and BUSH JR. the size of our government EXPLODED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

President Obama is doing and has done a very excellent job in trying to get us out of a HUGE RAVINE of DEBT that began in 1980. He needs much more support to get us out. 14 yrs of republican headed government has been disasterous.

The RIGHT WING of STUPORVILLE is only pushing an agenda of ugly hatred with NO pogressive solutions. It's not time to HARK back to those pioneer daze one bit. To dismantle programs that helped bring our Nation out of The Great Depression is thoughtless and mean.

wwendt 2 years, 7 months ago

I have not read Paul Dunn in a long time, but this diatribe of his is way out of line. First off, the financial crisis was NOT caused by the Bush administration, but was due primarily to prior urgings of Congressional members, both Democratic and Republican, that everyone in this country had the right to "own his own home". As a result underwriting standards declined to the point where anyone could qualify for a mortgage, and the resulting calamity was due to the high foreclosure rate as 25% of these loans became delinquent in the first year.

As for what to do in the next election, I have to say that the Obama initatives, including the new Healthcare bill, have done NOTHING to bring about any fundamental change in the system, especially in terms of making things more efficint, and certainly have not done anything directly to help the economy.

The Cash for Clunkers program had NO long-term impact and in fact just resulted in a moving forward of plans to purchase new cars. In the meantime thousands of useful and okay cars were destroyed under this program, increasing the cost of good used cars that those who need transportation but cannot afford new cars, have to purchase. The First -time Homebuyers credit was more of the same. Nothing has helped this economy, and the emphasis on "new hires" created is a false statistic. Perhaps the "infrastructure" bill if it is passed, and the emphasis on "education" will have a more salutatory effect. But if President Obama really wants to help and preserve quality education, then he should protect the position of the current head of the DC schools, whose job is in jeopardy due to a change in administration in that city.

As an adjunct instructor at UNC-Pembroke, I can tell you that our students have little in the way of math skills, and cannot write a clear sentence. They need excellent training for today's more complex jobs.

I for one no the Republican party is far from perfect, but there policies are a darn sight more ecnomically sound, than those of this administration. wmw

None 2 years, 7 months ago

blake ~ the numbers are fundamentally skewed by which web presence one might view. I can provide about 10 web links which contradict whether Bush inherited a surplus or a deficit from the Clinton Administration; like which side of an apple does one bit to see what's on the remaining half.

**Prometheus => good for you...I qualified your facts! So, you haven't answered my question. How did "POTUS'O" end up with a 14 trillion dollar debt in 20 months ~ according to Richard Burr who received more money from Pharmaceutical companies than any other Senator or Congress representative? http://www.opensecrets.org

wwendt => "As a result underwriting standards declined to the point where anyone could qualify for a mortgage," and that Professor Wendt was a result of uninsured "default swaps" which become known as "toxic paper". Hedge Fund investors' were unregulated and were allowed by the Bush Administration to buy and sell mortgages that were inflated by the market ~ not insured by the feds. Like most conservatives, blame the homeowners as opposed to corrupt companies like CountryWide. Look no further than your morning news to see what those lending institutions who were “bailed out” with TARP funds are using narrowminded methodology to remove homeowners from their homes, when in fact, their mortgages are rudimentary at best and they are processing foreclosures without reading the small print – their small print! Hopefully POTUS'O can restore some integrity to Wall Street and reel in the Hedge Fund Broker Managers who earn a meager 50 million-plus a year by manipulating of the market.

The Cash for Clunkers program kept the working class employed; those who build tires at Kelly Springfield and Goodyear in Fayetteville. Those who make wiring harnesses, illumination products, paint, steel, transmissions! And many of the thousands of parts for cars and trucks have a regular pay check.

"The First -time Homebuyers credit was more of the same" when the banks would lend mortgage money that the taxpayers anted up. Perhaps the National Board of Realtors may be a good starting point for supporting or disproving your assertion.

Professor => "I for one no the Republican party [Party] is far from perfect" shouldn't you have said, "know" and capitalized Party? Since I am taking classes, I can say without hesitation or reservation, my professors are adamant when it comes to writing: Dr. Spivey, Dr. Harrington, Professor David, and Professor Trevilyn all accept nothing short of quality scholarly academic performance.

Herbert Hoover, Barack Obama and a Banana Republic

More like this story

Comments

May events