While true in theory there is some concern that FDR’s health impeded his negotiations at Yalta. People want a vigorous president (often with good reason) and it’s hard for a cripple to look vigorous.
(As an aside I think FDR was a great president even if he probably should have stepped aside by the time of the 1944 elections.)
Could be worse, I suppose. You could be one of those douches who thinks professional pinch hitters are actually major league baseball players instead of musclebound temp workers.
Your regular douchinesss as it pertains to this pitting will have to do for now.
He’s the D-bag who follows the D-backs! Easy to remember!
Says the guy who voluntarily lives in an American League ptooie! city?
His health problems in '44 didn’t really have anything to do with his being crippled, though.
(Plus, Truman was in good health and also ended up making a lot of concessions to Stalin. The fact was that Stalin had the US over a barrel at the end of the war, there wasn’t really anything the US could do to keep him out of Eastern Europe, especially as we wanted his help in the Pacific theatre. It didn’t really matter who was at the other end of negotiating table, healthy or otherwise).
He was a true legend for sure! 
Your Mom is a true legend.
Baa Baaa Baaaa Bad.
All I know is nailing his feces on that church door was a shit move.
Why is it the major assassins use 3 names?
Hubert Humphrey?
It’s easy to romanticize protestors and “consciousness raisers” who are out of office, but it’s politicians who are responsible for laws, and we have to take their role seriously instead of just electing any old dude and acting like it doesn’t matter.
That said, Martin L. King was all right. We could use another popular socialist in this country.
MLK may have had flaws, but his noble spirit embiggens the smallest man.
I’ve never heard “embiggens” before. Is that even a word?
I don’t know why. It’s a perfectly cromulent word.
It’s a perfectly cromulent word.
No one said “altogether”.
I’ll bet Chicago is just thrilled with the prospect.
Yeah. We get to live with that, on top of the knowledge that Chicago is where Dr. King was hit in the head with a rock.
We try not to remember good people by their worst moments, but rather by their best. MLK used his time on this earth to improve the lot of oppressed people, knowing full well that his personal reward would be a bullet.
You, on the other hand, hide your personal failings behind anonymity and just being quiet about them. Your list of King’s shortcomings are rather petty. As far as you know, you’ve never plagiarized? Do you want a medal? You don’t cheat on your spouse? Well, no one but your spouse would have you, and probably hasn’t for as long as possible. You accuse the man of being a communist (as if that were a crime) when in fact he wasn’t, and it was a scurrilous lie made up by his enemies. He was a Republican liberal, a political philosophy that no longer exists.
I curse you: “May you lose all intelligence you were born with and become a Chicago Cubs fan by choice.” My curses have the ability to go back in time to take effect. As you will undoubtedly notice. Just now.
True, but often depending on political persuasion, personal bigotry, and ignorance; or any combination.
The press could have focused on FDR’s affairs, except that he was busy saving the country and winning a war. They could have focused on Ike’s supposed affair with Kay Summersby, except that he was managing a war against one of the worst monsters in history. Jefferson could have been condemned for all time for his relationship with Sally Hemings, except for that writing the Declaration of Independence thing. History is full of flawed people who have done great things. Luckily, most sane people focus on the greatness and forgive the weakness. Then there are people like the OP who choose to dwell on the tawdry details of a person’s life in order to feel somehow superior to them.
Columbus, on the other hand, was a dick.