Good thing I like Escher, huh?

No, I don't think FDR was the closest we have come to a despot. Despots, by their historical definition, hold absolute and unlimited power and authority over their nations, answering to no one but God and themselves. Thus, I feel like your question was comparing FDR to other, contemporary "despots" like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, etc. and I answered accordingly. FDR was chosen by the popular voting majority and our established electoral process as the chief executive of our republic, who would work within his established enumerated powers in conjunction with the legislative branch and under the watchful eye of the judicial branch to help guide, promote and protect the nation against all threats, foreign and domestic.

I find it unfortunate that you feel that the only time government has the authority to intervene in American economic affairs is when the nation has military personnel committed in combat situations, whether the situations are declared wars or not. There was very little shooting going on during the Reagan years, yet he deficit spent quite happily to help fix the economic crisis that the previous three Presidents had left him.

I have made the point quite clearly and loudly in the past that Reagan had the "formula" right, where FDR and the New Deal Congress had it wrong: Reagan cut taxes, but continued to spend into the red. FDR did raise taxes, substantially too (especially after 1938) and spent more money than he was taking in. This was a FLAW in the New Deal planning and execution that I have recognized and admitted to from the very beginning. It is why I can call myself (and Reagan) REAL Keynesian economic advocates, and why I don't think FDR was. So, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, stop saying that my opinions concerning New Deal's success or failure is contrary to my stated economic and fiscal opinions, because they are NOT. I have said all along that FDR should have spent the money to provide the relief, recovery and reform... but he should have lowered (or left unchanged) the marginal tax rates to better keep money earned in the hands of people that would put it to the best use. Like the NRA, it is simply a facet of the New Deal that didn't work, as history has shown us quite clearly.

Why are you so quick to point to FDR's policies, but you've never responded to my questions about how you felt about Eisenhower's public works projects, 91% tax rates, and 17% GDP deficits when he WASN'T a war-time President? Was Ike's Presidency as much a failure as Roosevelt's? How much better would the American economy have been had he championed a top marginal rate of even 54% rather than 91%? Why should we all vilify FDR's New Deal programs when Ike increased SSI regulation and created the Cabinet seat for Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, which would oversee and promote every single surviving New Deal program still running (few though they were)? To suggest that he was simply "following his predecessor's lead" in continuing and promoting New Deal policies, and signing some very "New Deal-like" programs into law himself, would then mean that Reagan's refusal to continue the paradigm is far less meaningful than even I have credited him with, wouldn't it?

If Ike could see the benefit that the Interstate Highway System would have to the nation's economy and chose to okay the projects as Federal works to be funded, directed, and managed by the Federal government (meaning more money and bigger government), shouldn't I read your follow up post telling me how wrong he was for doing that? How is the money spent on the Interstates better than what was spent on the TVA, Hoover Dam, Golden Gate, or the national electric power grid? Ike had no more insight into the Soviet's plans to drop nukes on American cities than FDR did with the needs that the TVA would fulfill during WWII, so surely that isn't your response, right?

You know what, though? As much fun as I have sparring with you over this sort of debate, as long as you accuse me of contradictory logic while I accuse you of maintaining your double standard, we aren't going to get anywhere. So, whenever you feel you've had enough, we can let this go until such time as it rears its ugly head again and needs to get flogged into the dirt once more.