I'm not normally a fan of FDR but I make an exception here. I am reading "1944" by Jay Winick and I came upon what Roosevelt did to protect the country from German loyalists posing as refugees. What he did is EXACTLY what Obama is not doing to keep Americans safe from Jihadis. This comes on page 241, the first full paragraph.
"The president was unsparing in his assessment of Nazi aggression and of those, at home and abroad, who sought to justify it. 'The experience of the past two years has proven beyond doubt that no nation can appease the Nazis. No man can tame a tiger into a kitten by stroking it. There can be no appeasement with ruthlessness.' He derided those who insisted that the United States should throw its influence 'into the scale of a dictated peace,' 'a negotiated peace,' with a 'gang of outlaws.' This would only he said, 'lead Americans to pay tribute to save your own skins.' America must not, he now preached, 'acquiesce' in Europe's defeat, 'submit tamely' to an Axis victory or 'wait our turn' to be the target of an attack later on. This would only embolden Germany and the Axis powers in their unremitting drive to subjugate the world, the outcome of which would be 'all of us and all Americans. . .living at the point of a gun. (1941)
This part of the speech could be used by Obama by changing references to Germany with Jihadis but he hasn't, and never will admit, even the danger in which we find ourselves today. FDR didn't allow German refugees into America without extensive background checks, unlike our present POTUS with muslims, Mexicans, and whoever else can reach the border. FDR, in fact, hesitated to allow German Jews in the country and they were already being persecuted by the Nazis.
Democrats idolize FDR but would never willingly show this to Americans and allow them to see that Obama does not have the security of the country as a priority, if at all. 70 years later we face another fight for our lives but Obama believes we can somehow appease ruthless people. It is truly sad how not only Obama, but the congress, has not studied the past to get guidance for the future.
