So much for quiet late night conversation.

My opening line after Ryan says "Hello?" last night at around 1:30 AM my time?

"Have you lost your BLEEPING mind?"

But he brought up serious points concerning New Deal and the Great Depression that I can no longer ignore as Republican revisionism.

Did the New Deal end the Great Depression? No.

Did massive government spending help the private sector recover? No.

Was the New Deal a failure? No.

I know, Ryan is shouting at the computer screen. The New Deal was designed to yank America out of the depression of 1929. Did it? Most of the original New Deal legislation enacted in the first 100 days gets struck down in 1935 by the Supreme Court, (NRA and AAA) and none of which were really a factor as the depression had ended in the spring of '33. But two reasons, one of which FDR COULD NOT envision in 1933, saves the legacy of the entire New Deal package.

1) The WPA.

2) The effect the TVA, BLM and aspects of WPA have on the war effort post '41.

It was my contention last night and I submit it for review for the whole Bund that WE DO NOT WIN THE WAR without the industrial infrastructure set up by these New Deal programs. Without the electricty provided by the plethora of Depression era dams built, our capacity for industrial manufacture is not neary what it is in 1941. Other projects include the bridges. Golden Gate and Oakland Bay are two, but how many Depression era bridges spanned the MS river, or had a massive impact on industrial centers throughout the US? How much of an impact do these have on getting workers to and from the docks, factories, etc. during the war?

Granted, this is opinion. I am not saying New Deal won us the war. I am saying we don't win it without the projects mentioned above and THAT saves the New Deal legacy.

A last question. Do we win the war without the bomb? Because there is NO WAY the Manhatten Project succeeds without the power generated by the TVA and the western dams.