The History Book Club discussion
PRESIDENTIAL SERIES
>
8. NO ORDINARY TIME ~ CHAPTER 11 - 12 mid (282 - 333) (12/07/09 - 12/13/09) ~ No spoilers, please
Mod
Now came a potentially controversial measure asking for the Neutrality Act restrictions to be removed which prevented merchant ships from being armed.
What do you think of this request, of the situation that FDR faced and what were his options pro and con? What else could FDR have done to prevent the U-Boat sinkings in the Atlantic or the threats to the American submarines?
Background leading up to this dilemma:
"During the months of September and October, the president was preoccupied with U-boat sinkings in the Atlantic. On the 19th of September, the Pink Star, an American cargo vessel, was sunk off Greenland. Included in the lost cargo was enough cheddar cheese to feed more than three and a half million laborers in Britain for an entire week; a supply of evaporated milk which represented a year's production for three hundred cows; and crates of machine tools which required the labor of three hundred workers for four months. Three weeks later, the Kearney, one of America's newest destroyers, built in New Jersey at a cost of $5 million, was torpedoed while on patrol near Iceland; and two weeks after that, the destroyer Reuben James was sunk, with the loss of over a hundred American sailors.
"I think the Navy are thoroughly scared about their inability to stamp out the submarine menace." Stimson confessed in his diary. "The Germans have adopted new methods of hunting in packs and shooting under water without showing themselves and it is a new deal and it is pretty hard to handle."
Roosevelt understood that lend-lease would fail unless the United States could keep the sea-lanes open."
Source: No Ordinary Time - page 282
Mod
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrali...
Source; Wikipedia
Congress Repeals the 1939 Neutrality Act:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/j...
As was mentioned in Thread #7, today is Pearl Harbor Day. What better way to remember the events on that day 68 years ago that to read about the events that led up to it. I look forward to reading the rest of Chapter 11 and also 12.Did you plan it this way, Bentley, or did it just work out?
Mod
Pearl Harbor Day - December 7th
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.act...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_o...
Mod
Should the US back away from involvement in foreign entanglements as the founding fathers including George Washington cited? Should we develop a more isolationist approach in terms of foreign wars or has the world become a smaller place and therefore it is difficult for any nation to remove itself from the cross-hairs of global disputes?
Mod
Pearl Harbor Day 2009: three enduring mysteries
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20091207/...
Thanks for all the links, Bentley. That video is well worth watching.There is so much to talk about in this week's reading. I wish we had a couple of weeks on it.
Now that we are talking about Japan too, I want to recommend John Toland's book, The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire 1936-45. It is excellent. It tells the story of all these events more from the Japanese side. It helped me understand why Japan made some of its choices. I especially appreciated the explanations of the culture that influenced the choices.
John Willard TolandWhat I remember from Toland's book matches with what Goodwin wrote in NOT. Japan felt trapped because of the oil embargo. Toland also went on to say that Japan felt belittled that FDR wasn't giving their envoys more time and personal attention. Mostly the talks were being done through others in such a way that didn't give Japan the honor that they felt they deserved. Reading NOT, we can see how much was on FDR's plate at the time, so I'm not sure if he could have done it differently. On page 287, Goodwin quotes FDR as telling Hull, "We must strain every nerve to satisfy and keep on good relations with this group of Japanese negotiators." I don't think the Japanese felt this.
I don't remember if Toland said the Japanese negotiators knew of the proposed plan to attack Pearl Harbor, but I do remember that they weren't in on it. In other words, they weren't faking the talks. The negotiators, that is. I wish I had a copy of the book so I could look things up again. (I read it from the library.) What I remember is that the negotiators were worried Japan might do something, so they were trying to get things worked out with the US, and they found out about Pearl Harbor after Hull did.
Of course, Toland's book was written in 1970, so new information may now be available.
Mod
I remember reading Toland's book...it is one of those classics that might bear rereading. I think at the time FDR and others felt that while the negotiators were here they were preparing to catch the US by surprise which Toland I believe refutes. Of course, I am not sure where the truth lies; but secrecy seemed to be Japan's modus operandi...so it all might be true. But the oil embargo was an insurmountable problem for the Japanese.
I think a lot of folks felt that FDR wasn't giving them the attention they deserved or wanted. Even Churchill complained about this now and again and felt that FDR had sidled up to Stalin.
Sometimes it is so hard to understand in retrospect...you only have what others folks have written and the truth sometimes lies somewhere in between.
Bentley
I'm glad I'm not the only one who read Toland's book. It is good that someone else can catch me if I misremember anything.You have a good point that a lot of people felt they weren't getting enough of FDR's time. From the Japanese perspective, I can see that it would hurt their pride. But really, it would be surprising if everyone did feel they got enough time. FDR was busy, and he liked it that way.
Mod
I was interested in the comment by one advisor that neither FDR nor Churchill had a very steady personality and also by Eleanor's observations that both of them were perhaps a little "war games crazy." I'll go out on a limb here and suggest that some people, esp. some men, do have a tendency to get caught up in the hardware and logistics and process of things, sometimes forgetting that other people may not find the process part pleasant or enjoyable at all e.g. people who are deeply into auto mechanics or computer software sometimes forget that other people find the process painful rather than intriguing.
If that last comment is offensive, please ignore it. I'm just imagining how someone very person and feeling oriented, like Eleanor, might have felt.
Mod
Andrea,I don't think your comment is offensive. Maybe a few more examples would help you not feel like you are targeting a specific person. Some people are very social and feed off of talking with others. Seems strange to them that there are people who dislike casual conversation. Some people really like reading books, and can't imagine anyone who can't find SOMETHING to read. (Okay, I plead guilty to that one.) The list could go on.
I wonder what anyone would say about FDR and Churchill if they hadn't had such extraordinary circumstances to live up to. In other words, if they had just been stock brokers or salesmen or even political leaders without the momentous events. Of course, it could be argued that they would have made their mark on history whatever the times they had been given. But perhaps their mark would have been less heroic, and their weaknesses less forgiven.
Mod
Yes, folks are very hard on our icons. It really as if they like to bring people down..I have never understood that philosophy...I like having folks to look up to and admire.
Elizabeth, I read with interest your comments on the Japanese perspective. I'm wondering whether their feeling that FDR wasn't giving them enough attention was intensified due to cultural expectations? They seem much more concerned with ceremonial correctness. They have that elaborate tea ceremony. We grab a cup of coffee.
Adelle wrote: "Elizabeth, I read with interest your comments on the Japanese perspective. I'm wondering whether their feeling that FDR wasn't giving them enough attention was intensified due to cultural expectati..."I think that makes a lot of sense and certainly was part of the issue. That Hirohito book looks like it really gives a new perspective on things. It is amazing how uncertain history is. How much did so-and-so really know? What did who's-it really think? I don't see why anyone would think history is boring.
Mod
Add the cover just like you did and then go right back in and click author at the top; find the author's name and if there is a photo beside it, click photo at the bottom, if it is just the author's name then click link and then add.
You should have the following:
Herbert P. BixThis is one of the things we are relentless in asking everybody to do; in fact I am going through all of the threads to make sure that we have done this. The first thing it does is to help the reader easily click on the cover and read about the book and decide if they would like to read it, get it from the library or purchase it some other way; it gives folks the ability to click and see other reviews etc. and who else is talking about the book. When you add either the photo or the author's link, the same can be done but additionally the reader can find out a little about the author and other things that he or she has written.
This feature is a great feature because it also does the following:
Look at the white space to the right of the messages and comments boxes. You may have to scroll up. You will see an entire list of all of the books mentioned in the thread which can be accessed as well as an entire list of authors whose books have been mentioned anywhere on the thread. Folks can access both lists and even print them out. Additionally, when you click on other topics beside the list of the book title or beside the author's name; you will be taken to an entire list of threads and locations on this site where we have also talked about that particular book or author. Everything is linked beautifully when you simply add both the author's link or photo and the book cover. I hope this helps
Thank you for figuring out how to add the cover...that was very much appreciated.
Mod
Christian Science Monitor - December 9, 2009
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1210/p0...
And the Other Side: (The folks who feel that the attack was known about ahead of time)
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTI...
I am posting both views so that folks can make up their own minds. I make no judgement either way.
Mod
How the Japanese Did It?
http://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhi...
Mod
On page 283, DKG states: "Still, it was not easy to get the Congress to act. The revision passed the House by a close margin and then stalled in the Senate, where critics argued that the US was provoking incidents at sea in order to arouse the American public. "If we continue to look for trouble. " Senator Robert Reynolds warned, "the probabilities are that we will eventually find it." Was anyone surprised that American ships were being fired on? American Firster John Flynn asked, "American war vessels, under orders of war-like Knox, are hunting down German subs....The American people must realize that...they are the victims of a conspiracy to hurry them into the war."
In view of the documents that have been revealed, did Senator Reynolds and American Firster John Flynn have a point? Or were these some political rantings of the opposition (who no matter what) wanted to remain out of the war.
Mod
In retrospect, wasn't it a weakness of FDR which stopped him from correcting this mistake in terms of how his orders were being carried out?
Mod
To me he seems rather distracted by his adventures.
Mod
"If it was something that was bad, he just became almost like an iceberg, and there was never the slightest emotion that was allowed to show."
One reason why I do not believe that FDR was in on any conspiracy is that he did not want to fight the war on two fronts. He also stated to Eleanor, "We haven't got the Navy to fight in both the Atlantic and the Pacific....so we will have to build up the Navy and the Air Force and that will mean that we will have to take a good many defeats before we can have a victory."
He seemed to be logical, pragmatic and not pleased with the hand that he had been dealt.
Mod
What I found amazing was at that time FDR and Hopkins actually believed that the Japanese were going to land on the West Coast and possibly invade. And that they might get to Chicago?
It was evident that the Navy was dangerously crippled and FDR was seriously worried about it.
Mod
"The US was like a "gigantic boiler. Once the fire is lighted under it there is no limit to the power it can generate."
I also liked how Eleanor faced things on her weekly radio broadcast:
"For months now, the knowledge that something of this kind might happen has been hanging over our heads....That is all over now and there is no more uncertainty. We know what we have to face and we know we are ready to face it...Whatever is asked of us, I am sure we can accomplish it; we are free and unconquerable people of the U.S.A."
The tagging of the Chinese nationals by the Chinese consulates was telling: "Chinese, not Japanese, please." Prejudice, bias, anger directed at a particular sect of people can happen overnight. You could feel from what DKG wrote that the anger was building towards any Japanese nationals in the United States. It is sad when things like this happen; but understandable for that time period...I think folks are like this from fear. Have we seen these sort of reactions since World War II?
It is hard to believe in retrospect that the Japanese ambassador was so far out of the loop that he was talking to FDR at exactly the same time that Japan's airplanes were bombing Pearl Harbor!
Note: I also wanted to find out more about Sir Edward Grey:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_G...
http://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/grey...
http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Sir_...
Europe - 1063 weeks: Time - May 1939 (before the start of WWII)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/art...
Mod
"Lack of readiness characterized every aspect of the base - from the unmanned aircraft batteries to the radar station whose sentries went of duty at 7AM that morning."
Mod
I have to ask what were they thinking...but I then tried to imagine what being cut off from oil (all types) would do to the United States. It was a commodity that they could not do without.
Any thoughts on the Japanese perspective and/or why differences could not have been resolved at that time.
Sidebar:
One interesting sidebar mentioned by DKG was that Jeanette Rankin was the only dissenting vote in Congress about going to war (WWI and WWII). Not that this was a correct vote; but I raise this point to bring out some additional information regarding her and Congress.
She was a pacifist and was the first woman to be elected to the United States House of Representatives and the first female member of the Congress sometimes referred to as the Lady of the House. In fact, Montana allowed women to vote earlier than most of the remainder of the country and Rankin had been instrumental in bringing that about in 1914.
On November 7, 1916 she was elected to the House of Representatives as a Republican from Montana, becoming the first female member of Congress.
The Nineteenth Amendment (which gave women the right to vote everywhere in the United States) was not ratified until 1920; therefore, during Rankin's first term in Congress (1917-1919), many women throughout the country did not have the right to vote, though they did in her home state of Montana.
When she was 87 in 1967, she organized a rally of 5000 women to go to DC to support opposition to the Vietnam War. An amazing woman in many ways. She also had admired Martin Luther King. She died when she was 92. She also helped found the American Civil Liberties Union.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeannett...
http://www.history.com/content/womenh...
US Senate biography: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/h...
Biography with quite a nice oil painting of her: http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/...
I'm No Lady, I am a Member of Congress:
http://womenincongress.house.gov/hist...
http://womenincongress.house.gov/memb...
Watch Women Who Changed the Course of History:
http://www.history.com/content/womenh...
Women in the United States Congress - 1917 - 2005:
http://holt.house.gov/pdf/CRS_on_wome...
Mod
James J. Lopach
Gretchen Woelfle
Norma SmithJeannette Rankin, first lady in Congress A biography - There is no book cover available - by Hannah Josephson
Sue Davidson
Trish Marx
Mary Barmeyer O'BrienThe following do not have book covers; therefore I am adding the links:
Flight of the Dove The Story of Jeannette Rankin by Kevin S. Giles
First woman in Congress, Jeannette Rankin by Florence Meiman White
The First Woman in Congress Jeannette Rankin by Judy Rachel Block
I agree with the comment that if FDR had known the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor, he would not have left so much of the American fleet so vulnerable there. It just doesn't make sense if he wanted to win the war, even if one can accept the premise that FDR could have been so callously unconcerned about the armed forces and civilians who would be killed or traumatized. I could accept the argument that a president might want a decisive attack on a small U.S. target, however, to draw the country into war.
I wonder if any of the members who are more informed than I about military history have gone over this ground and what they think.
Mod
Andrea,
I tend to agree; FDR loved the Navy and I believe he took this blow personally and would never have wanted this to happen to these men.
I do think his subordinates needed to be tethered better. One thing to remember is that his subordinates misinterpreted his intent before (accidentally or on purpose) when he agreed to only a limited embargo on Japan; not a full embargo and all oils. He could have just been a less than perfect personnel manager; and he was away a lot.
Bentley
Mod
Mod
It was hard to believe that the pilot would bring a wire report that San Francisco was being bombed by the Japanese. How could communications be so mixed up and so erroneous!
Didn't you love what she said to the Governor of California - "I am not here to give you any message. I am here to get down to work. I came here to find out from you what are the most helpful things we in Washington can do to help you. Tell me what you found lacking and what you want."
Page 296:
Of course, with the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese; already there was a backlash beginning to develop against the Japanese. As DKG pointed out there was a growing hysteria directed against aliens and citizens of Japanese descent. In fact, within two hours of the bombing..the FBI was chasing down key Japanese leaders and taking them into custody. Newspapers like the LA Times declared that California was a zone of danger and their was broad hysteria against all Japanese Americans. There were rumors about houses being searched where Japanese Americans lived and because they had a "feudal doll" or any Japanese recordings they were carted away. The story about the Ishiharas was so sad to think what they had been put through; it was also wonderful to see that a Jewish friend helped them out.
Eleanor was true to form, posed with a group of American-born Japanese in Tacoma, Washington and asked for tolerance for the loyal Japanese and Germans.
Page 297:
The LA Times actually was antagonized by this statement and stated that she should be forced to retire from public life. Wow!
But you have to love Eleanor. She stated: "I think almost the biggest obligation we have today is to prove that in a time of stress we can still live up to our beliefs and maintain the civil liberties we have established as the rights of human beings everywhere."
But what is most disturbing is that it does not appear that FDR held Eleanor's views and in 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 authorizing the mass incarceration of over 110,000 Japanese Americans during World War II.
How do you feel about this Executive Order and do you think that this kind of mass hysteria could take over in the future and could this possibly happen to another group of Americans due to our war on terrorism?
It appeared that FDR did not have his usual companionship while Eleanor was away during these trying times when he needed to have work done round the clock...Missy LeHand was not around to fill the gap.
Regarding Japanese Internment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese...
http://www.asianamericanmedia.org/jai...
Children of the Camps:
http://www.pbs.org/childofcamp/
Mod
What did everyone think of the delay in hearing from Nazi Germany after America had declared war on Japan?
This paragraph had so much in it:
The answer came on December 11, when Adolf Hitler, who viewed America as a decadent democracy incapable of making a sustained commitment to war, delivered a vitriolic speech against Roosevelt and declared war against the United States.
"A world-wide distance separates Roosevelt's ideas and my ideas," he began.
"Roosevelt comes from a rich family and belongs to the class whose path is smoothed in the democracies."
"I was only the child of a small, poor family and had to fight my way by work and industry."
"Whereas National Socialism had led to an unprecedented economic revival in Germany, Hitler claimed, Roosevelt's New Deal had not succeeded in bringing about even the slightest improvement."
"This is not surprising if one bears in mind that the men he had called to support him, or rather, the men who had called him, belonged to the Jewish element, whose interests are all for disintegration and never for order."
And then, Hitler contended, Roosevelt had provoked war in order to cover up the failures of his New Deal.
"This man alone," he thundered "was responsible for the Second World War," and under the circumstances, Germany "considers herself to be at war with the United States, as from today."
There are so many things to talk about here:
Why did Hitler view America as a decadent democracy?
Why did Hitler believe that America could not make a sustained commitment to war and did he miscalculate tremendously?
Why was Hitler so vitriolic and why did he try to make this a personal thing between Roosevelt and himself; which it was not?
Why did Hitler have to bring forward the differences between his station in life and that of Roosevelt's upbringing? What did that have to do with anything?
How could Hitler view National Socialism as being so successful and the New Deal as being a dismal failure?
Was Hitler trying to create the impression that Roosevelt was a puppet of the Jewish people?
Why did Hitler have the impression of the Jewish people as those who want disintegration rather than order. Was this his smoke screen in getting rid of the Jewish population?
As Hitler continued to come unglued, he stated unbelievably that Roosevelt who was just attacked by the Japanese was responsible solely for the Second World War!!! How delusional was Hitler about what he was putting Europe through?
It is obvious that Hitler had some deep-seated insecurities about Roosevelt and Jewish people. Additionally, I can see by his out of control response that he was deeply worried by the American involvement in the war. A very sad time and it is deeply painful thinking about how much America, Europe and the poor Jewish people had to endure. Also, the Japanese Americans who all were interned and had their lives and their businesses uprooted. Sad, so sad.
(Bentley, you are tact personified. Thank you for the instructions.)
I checked out some of the links. Thank you. Interesting. I read both sides of the "Did the US know in advance about Pearl Harbor." I, too, think not: FDR deeply loved the Navy; also, the US seriously needed those ships.
In reading, I came to appreciate the little details DKG included. For me, they somehow added texture to my picture of WWII history.
A couple items I came across that I thought were interesting:
I DID find my notes on the oil embargo. It was Dean Acheson, who was Assistant Sect. of State at the time, who was in charge. From Jean Edward Smith's FDR. (A very good book, in my opionion.)
Also, in NOT, on page 310, DKG quotes an observation made by Curtis Roosevelt concerning Eleanor. Reminded me that he had written a book of his own about his time living at the White House. He moved in when he was about 3 ... about the time that FDR became president, and Curtis and his sister lived them for most of 12 years. They liked to climb into bed and visit their grandfather. Curtis R has warmer memories of FDR than of Eleanor.
Maybe one last add. Yes. FDR would doubtless have had closer press scrutiny regarding the women in his life were he president today. In addition to Princess Martha, by late 1941 (October), the former Lucy Mercer (under the alias Mrs. Johnson) was visiting the White House when Eleanor was in NYC or otherwise away from Washington DC. White House logs read: "Mrs. Johnson and her daughter have tea." "Mrs. Johsnon has dinner." Etc. If I remember correctly, the initial meetings were set up by Anna R, FDR and ER's daughter. (From FDR and Lucy)
Curtis Roosevelt
Jean Edward Smith
Resa Willis
I checked out some of the links. Thank you. Interesting. I read both sides of the "Did the US know in advance about Pearl Harbor." I, too, think not: FDR deeply loved the Navy; also, the US seriously needed those ships.
In reading, I came to appreciate the little details DKG included. For me, they somehow added texture to my picture of WWII history.
A couple items I came across that I thought were interesting:
I DID find my notes on the oil embargo. It was Dean Acheson, who was Assistant Sect. of State at the time, who was in charge. From Jean Edward Smith's FDR. (A very good book, in my opionion.)
Also, in NOT, on page 310, DKG quotes an observation made by Curtis Roosevelt concerning Eleanor. Reminded me that he had written a book of his own about his time living at the White House. He moved in when he was about 3 ... about the time that FDR became president, and Curtis and his sister lived them for most of 12 years. They liked to climb into bed and visit their grandfather. Curtis R has warmer memories of FDR than of Eleanor.
Maybe one last add. Yes. FDR would doubtless have had closer press scrutiny regarding the women in his life were he president today. In addition to Princess Martha, by late 1941 (October), the former Lucy Mercer (under the alias Mrs. Johnson) was visiting the White House when Eleanor was in NYC or otherwise away from Washington DC. White House logs read: "Mrs. Johnson and her daughter have tea." "Mrs. Johsnon has dinner." Etc. If I remember correctly, the initial meetings were set up by Anna R, FDR and ER's daughter. (From FDR and Lucy)
Curtis Roosevelt
Jean Edward Smith
Resa Willis
Adelle & Bentley,I wish I had more time this week to jump in on these discussions. I sit down, read through it all, have some thoughts to add, but not the time to formulate them and type them. Hopefully I'll get to it before we get to far into the next weeks. But I at least want you both to know I'm enjoying your thoughts. Thanks!
Mod
I checked out some of the links. Thank you. Interesting. I read both sides of the "Did the US know in advance about Pearl..."
Adele,
Dean Acheson...now that is a name from the past. And not one that some folks remember fondly: some even blame him for the escalation of the Korean.
conflict. I will let others decide what they might about him.
His grandson maybe liked to sidle up to FDR and in retrospect his memories of the president may have been more enhanced by his family members. Who knows...but FDR could in fact be quite the affable guy.
Yes there was quite a falling out between mother and daughter when mother found out the Anna was assisting with these meetings and with these deceptions. This must have hurt Eleanor tremendously. Bad enough for her philandering husband to betray her multiple times but for her daughter to get involved must have been too much for her to bear.
And thank you for the adds...they look good.
Bentley
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Ach...
Mod
I wish I had more time this week to jump in on these discussions. I sit down, read through it all, have some thoughts to add, but not the time to formulate them and type them. H..."
Elizabeth, we are glad you are enjoying them and when you get caught up that is OK.
As a mother myself, I can appreciate that Eleanor would be deeply hurt by her daughter's facilitating meetings for FDR and Lucy.
And yet, I have issues with Eleanor in this area, too.
Eleanor ADORED her father. Her father, Elliot, TR's brother, had dreadful faults/problems. The drinking. Which doubtless caused heartache and problems for Eleanor's mother. And yet, from what I've read, her mother never bad-mouthed Eleanor's father. So Eleanor could continue to hold him in her heart.
Yet Eleanor, who knows that her own children adored FDR---at least when they were young...some friction with sons, I think, later---breaks down and cries and unburdens herself about FDR and Lucy when
Anna was 15? 16?
I don't feel that was the grown-up, responsbile thing for her to do.
Eleanor I think wanted people on HER side. (Due to issues from her childhood.) It seems to that the cost to Anna was rather too high.
Anna kept letters from Lucy Mercer til the end of her life behind a photo beside her bed.
(I know. Rather an aside.)
And yet, I have issues with Eleanor in this area, too.
Eleanor ADORED her father. Her father, Elliot, TR's brother, had dreadful faults/problems. The drinking. Which doubtless caused heartache and problems for Eleanor's mother. And yet, from what I've read, her mother never bad-mouthed Eleanor's father. So Eleanor could continue to hold him in her heart.
Yet Eleanor, who knows that her own children adored FDR---at least when they were young...some friction with sons, I think, later---breaks down and cries and unburdens herself about FDR and Lucy when
Anna was 15? 16?
I don't feel that was the grown-up, responsbile thing for her to do.
Eleanor I think wanted people on HER side. (Due to issues from her childhood.) It seems to that the cost to Anna was rather too high.
Anna kept letters from Lucy Mercer til the end of her life behind a photo beside her bed.
(I know. Rather an aside.)
Mod
"The house was chill and silent, as though it had died. Even Fala did not bark."
It is odd how pets know when something is amiss!
Page 298 -
Tempers must also have been quite short.
Page 299 -
"When Morgenthau tried to get the president to visit the shelter, Roosevelt told the Treasury secretary, "Henry, I will not go down into the shelter unless you allow me to play polka with all of the gold in your vaults."
This was an article that just came out today which relates to one of our previous discussions on another thread: (interesting article)
Sixty Years Ago This Week: FDR's One Step Against the Holocaust
by Dr. Rafael Medoff
http://www.wymaninstitute.org/article...
Also,
Historical Perspectives on Franklin D. Roosevelt, American Foreign Policy and the Holocaust:
http://www.fdrheritage.org/fdr&ho...
White House Bomb Shelter:
http://whitehousepresidents.blogspot....
Mod
And yet, I have issues with Eleanor in this area, too.
Elea..."
Yes, very true...Eleanor adored the person who actually caused her family so much grief. Yet she could not it seems understand her own children's adulation probably because of the personal sacrifices that she herself had to make. She could have burdened her children with her sadness about their misplaced loyalties.
It appears that Anna and Eleanor had a problem and that Anna transplanted Lucy as the mother she wanted to have. Sad for both of them. And Lucy's place was not in their home; when Eleanor had been promised that this would stop. She would have given him his divorce and been done with it; so I think she felt played like a fiddle. I feel no more sympathy for Lucy Mercer than I do for Tiger Woods countless paramours or anybody else's mistress. I think there was more wrong with Lucy and with FDR than with Eleanor in this and she is not at fault in this regard. As far as Anna's involvement...it is disgraceful on the part of FDR to involve his children in deceiving their mother.
I personally think that FDR was emotionally immature when it came to women. Everyone of them was used for a purpose as was his daughter in arranging his trysts. Awful actually.
Mod
Churchill's aide de camp Commander C.R. (Tommy) Thompson made a very touching statement: "Washington represented something immensely precious. Freedom, hope, strength. We had not seen an illuminated city for five years. My heart filled."
How horrendous it must have been for the English people and for Britain.
However, the next quote was more than a bit rude:
"I was struck by the size of his head. I suppose that is why Winston thinks of him as majestic and statuesque, for he has no legs to speak of." (FDR)
- Page 301
"He reminded me of a big English bulldog who had been taught to give his paw." (Churchill)
-Page 302
I cannot believe that Churchill would say this to the President's butler.
"We want to leave here as friends, right? So I need you to listen. One, I don't like talking outside my quarters; two, I hate whistling in the corridors; and three, I must have a tumbler of sherry in my room before breakfast, a couple of glasses of scotch and soda before lunch and French champagne and 90 year old brandy before I go to sleep at night."
And I am in awe of the butler who was not in the least perturbed.
This shows a very sharp rebuttal by FDR: (not very sensitive)
"Repulsed by the abundant trays of liquor that accompanied Churchill wherever he went, Eleanor went to Franklin. White House maid Lillian Parks recalled, and told him "that she worried about Churchill's influence on him because of all of the drinking, FDR retorted she needn't worry because it wasn't his side of the family that had a drinking problem.
Mod
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi...
Lillian Rogers ParksThe Roosevelts A Family in Turmoil (no cover) by Lillian Rogers Parks
It was made into a mini-series:
http://www.blackclassicmovies.com/Top...
Bentley wrote: "How do you feel about this Executive Order and do you think that this kind of mass hysteria could take over in the future and could this possibly happen to another group of Americans due to our war on terrorism?"While the initial incarceration was a great injustice, it can be written off to irrational fear and ignorant racism.
What is unforgivable is keeping the Japanese in the camps long after it was clear that they were not a threat. That and refusing to compensate the internees for everything they lost except for a token $1.6 Billion in reparations awarded during the Reagan Administration, long after many of the internees had died and a fraction of the current worth of what the Japanese lost.
This is a dark blot on FDR, Earl Warren and others who panicked and then refuse to admit their mistake.
Could it happen again? You betcha. There are calls already from the Right Wing fringe to do the same to Muslims.
Yes, while I admire FDR's political abilities and am very grateful for all he did to preserve our country, I think he gave Eleanor much to put up with. He could be very cutting when it suited his purposes, as in the remark about drinking. I think maybe his mother gave him a sense of entitlement, not only in terms of class, but with women. I agree that he should never have allowed Anna to get involved with deceiving her own mother, but then Eleanor helped Anna deceive her husband, I think? Or at least, she became involved with her second husband while still married to her first and Eleanor helped? It's hard to fathom all the strains and tensions that our presidential families go through. Whatever personal matters they have to deal with, they have to put on a certain front of calm for the public.It's a way back in the book now, but I was thinking of the time FDR spent in mourning for his mother. And the press and public let him "disappear" for a bit to mourn. Quite a contrast to today, when we think taking time to mourn is "weak" I think. I'm thinking of how little time Bill Clinton had to mourn his mother, or Barack Obama his grandmother.
The History Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Battle of Wits: The Complete Story of Codebreaking in World War II (other topics)The Roosevelts: A Family in Turmoil (other topics)
My Thirty Years Backstairs at the White House (other topics)
Too Close to the Sun: Growing Up in the Shadow of my Grandparents, Franklin and Eleanor (other topics)
FDR and Lucy: Lovers and Friends (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Stephen Budiansky (other topics)Lillian Rogers Parks (other topics)
Curtis Roosevelt (other topics)
Resa Willis (other topics)
Jean Edward Smith (other topics)
More...
For the week of December 7th through December 13th, we are reading the next 52 pages of No Ordinary Time by Doris Kearns Goodwin.
The eighth week's assignment is:
December
December 7 – December 13 ~~ Chapter 11 mid – 12 (282 - 333)
Chapter Eleven- continued
Chapter Twelve – “Two Little Boys Playing Soldier”
We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.
This thread should only deal with this chapter and these pages. No spoilers, please.
Discussion on these sections will begin on December 7th.
Welcome,
Bentley
TO SEE ALL PREVIOUS WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL
Doris Kearns Goodwin