Why is Eisenhower so praised?

[ScottieF]

I'd say he's probably the best postwar president overall, if not necessarily the most consequential. He increased the nuclear stockpile yes, but cut conventional military spending and acted swiftly to end Korea. Growth of the suburbs and the middle class was facilitated by Eisenhower programs like the Interstate Highway System (maybe the largest single public works project in U.S. history?) - Ike himself was especially proud of the significant rise in median family income that occurred during his administration. He did not cut New Deal programs and even expanded Social Security. You could criticize him for dragging his feet on civil rights but the action he took at Little Rock says a lot about his convictions. Overall a very strong presidency - if not among the five best chief executives we ever had, then certainly in the top ten.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Because he was a decent President?

Though by mistake , he appointed Warren and Brennan that started desegregation. But, at the same time he brought Richard Nixon on and started the Southern Strategy.

His time as Army General made it possible for him to see the evils of separatism and apartheid due to Berlin's and Soviet division among themselves and the Jews.

Having not served as Army General, he would have not been president and done such a thing as start the desegregation, as well as Truman of America.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Eisenhower could've been a poor President and still be revered due to his wartime accomplishments. In the 60s, actually, he was widely considered a passive and unassuming chief executive, yet he was still revered.

Overall, I concur with present judgement he was a decent President, although obviously not without flaws.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Because he was a decent President?

Though by mistake , he appointed Warren and Brennan that started desegregation. But, at the same time he brought Richard Nixon on and started the Southern Strategy.

His time as Army General made it possible for him to see the evils of separatism and apartheid due to Berlin's and Soviet division among themselves and the Jews.

Having not served as Army General, he would have not been president and done such a thing as start the desegregation, as well as Truman of America.

Actually, Eisenhower was not a big fan of desegregation, at least while in the army. In fact, during a testimony before Senate, he voiced his scepticism toward desegregating armed forces.

As President, he long ignored the issue, despite appointing Justices such as Warren and Brennan, that made desegregation rulings possible. However, at the end, he knew there is no other way and acted accordingly.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Honestly, I think Ike is underrated, if anything.  He doesn't get anywhere near as much credit for passing civil rights legislation and enforcing desegregation, and as well as in other areas.  I suspect that probably has to do with the fact the he was Republican.

[Lankester Merrin]

he mishandled the Suez Canal crisis.

[Blair]

Hats of to Ike, he almost has everything you want in a cold war President.

-Stopped Mao expanding in Asia by protecting Korea and Taiwan
-Bought the US up to speed in the nuclear arms race, needed to be done
-Brought in stabler relations with the USSR in the 50's

Domestically
-Sent Troops into Little Rock, started a trend
-Built the goddam highways
-1957 civil rights act, that was watered down by the democrats
-Increased corporation tax and highest tax rate

[Comrade Funk]

Oh not to mention he was the Supreme Commander of the Allied Armies

[136or142]

You left out the Eisenhower did nothing to challenge Joe McCarthy.

On the other hand, he apparently set up the modern structure of the federal government.

Truman should have supported Ho Chi Minh and told France to get lost.

[136or142]

Well, for the most part I like Ike.

[Mr. Smith]

You left out the Eisenhower did nothing to challenge Joe McCarthy.

On the other hand, he apparently set up the modern structure of the federal government.

Truman should have supported Ho Chi Minh and told France to get lost.

Eisenhower really disliked McCarthy. It was not politically expedient do do anything at that time.

Wasn't politically expedient for Truman to fire MacArthur...that didn't stop him, and it turned out to be the best decision he made in office.

Wasn't politically expedient to try for Camp David, or normalize relations with China just before that, yet both were done. And ya' know what, neither of those two were well respected Army Generals.

So don't try that, he easily could've done things to discredit McCarthy and framed it as good, and given his personality and accomplishments, he would've been widely believed. Only psycho-fringe John Birchers would think otherwise.

[136or142]

Yes, but McCarthy ruined many decent people's lives before he crashed and burned.

[Mechaman]

I suspect it has something to do with many a forumite obsession with "respectable" politicians, regardless of how retrograde many of said politicians views were or the actual reasons for their policies.

[136or142]

I suspect it has something to do with many a forumite obsession with "respectable" politicians, regardless of how retrograde many of said politicians views were or the actual reasons for their policies.

I don't see how Eisenhower was retrograde. At all really. If anything he was moderately liberal.

Nixon is now called 'the last liberal president'

[SWE]

I suspect it has something to do with many a forumite obsession with "respectable" politicians, regardless of how retrograde many of said politicians views were or the actual reasons for their policies.

I don't see how Eisenhower was retrograde. At all really. If anything he was moderately liberal.

Nixon is now called 'the last liberal president'

Only by very stupid people

[136or142]

Nixon had some conservatives policies and some liberal policies, but:
1.He was the last president before Clinton who put forward a healthcare plan, which is apparently virtually identical to the plan Obama passed.
http://www.salon.com/2013/10/29/nixon_proposed_todays_affordable_care_act_partner/

2.He was the last president of either party to propose a guaranteed annual income.

You're right Nixon wouldn't be considered today as the last liberal president, he'd be considered the last socialist president (prior to Obama, of course.)

[Mechaman]

Nixon had some conservatives policies and some liberal policies, but:
1.He was the last president before Clinton who put forward a healthcare plan, which is apparently virtually identical to the plan Obama passed.
http://www.salon.com/2013/10/29/nixon_proposed_todays_affordable_care_act_partner/

2.He was the last president of either party to propose a guaranteed annual income.

You're right Nixon wouldn't be considered today as the last liberal president, he'd be considered the last socialist president (prior to Obama, of course.)

This sounds very impressive until you consider that the standard liberal position back in Nixon's day was to advocate for a universal healthcare program provided by the government.  That Obama plan was pretty much the same as Nixon's is far more a condemnation of modern Democrats than it is praise of old school moderate Republicans.

[Mechaman]

I suspect it has something to do with many a forumite obsession with "respectable" politicians, regardless of how retrograde many of said politicians views were or the actual reasons for their policies.

I don't see how Eisenhower was retrograde. At all really. If anything he was moderately liberal.

I didn't mean Ike specifically, this was more a general comment on figures that many people on here take a lazyboy chair historian take on instead of going outside the one or two issues that their underpaid non-tenured high school history teachers tell them were the only things that ever mattered.

But at the same time, "Operation Wetback" sounds pretty darn retrograde to me, as does using the CIA to knock over any democratically elected government that dare not agree with the Oilmen (see Iran).  And as it is, I agree with the notion that Ike was a respected enough general and a popular enough public figure in 1952 to have rebuked McCarthy.  Hell, it might've won him even more votes from swing liberal voters who were disgusted by the presence of John Sparkman on the Democratic ticket.  Yet he didn't.
If that isn't the sign of a retrograde I don't know what is.

[136or142]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Universal healthcare was also completely unnaceptable to the southern Democrats.  So, that Nixon offered anything on the issue, when I don't believe he had to, was still pretty liberal of him.

[Mechaman]

I suspect it has something to do with many a forumite obsession with "respectable" politicians, regardless of how retrograde many of said politicians views were or the actual reasons for their policies.

I don't see how Eisenhower was retrograde. At all really. If anything he was moderately liberal.

I didn't mean Ike specifically, this was more a general comment on figures that many people on here take a lazyboy chair historian take on instead of going outside the one or two issues that their underpaid non-tenured high school history teachers tell them were the only things that ever mattered.

But at the same time, "Operation Wetback" sounds pretty darn retrograde to me, as does using the CIA to knock over any democratically elected government that dare not agree with the Oilmen (see Iran).  And as it is, I agree with the notion that Ike was a respected enough general and a popular enough public figure in 1952 to have rebuked McCarthy.  Hell, it might've won him even more votes from swing liberal voters who were disgusted by the presence of John Sparkman on the Democratic ticket.  Yet he didn't.
If that isn't the sign of a retrograde I don't know what is.

Um, no. You can't call someone a retrograde based on one thing.

I mentioned several, reread the paragraph.  And no these aren't just minor issues either, at least to people who subscribe to semi-decent philosophies.

[Mechaman]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Universal healthcare was also completely unnaceptable to the southern Democrats.  So, that Nixon offered anything on the issue, when I don't believe he had to, was still pretty liberal of him.

By this logic Medicare Part D made Bush liberal.

[136or142]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it made him a 'compassionate conservative'

Liberal Nixon foreign policy
1.Opening up to China
2.Persuing Detante with the Soviet Union

[Sol]

It should be noted Nixon's much touted "Going to China" was on the back of Bangladeshi lives.

I would not describe sabotaging the Vietnam peace talks as liberal either, nor helping to overthrow the democratically elected Chilean and Cypriot governments. Or bombing Laotian and Cambodian villages.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it made him a 'compassionate conservative'

Liberal Nixon foreign policy
1.Opening up to China
2.Persuing Detante with the Soviet Union

My God. And it's "pursuing", not "persuing".

[Mechaman]

By this logic Medicare Part D made Bush liberal.

No, it made him a 'compassionate conservative'

Liberal Nixon foreign policy
1.Opening up to China
2.Persuing Detante with the Soviet Union

My God. And it's "pursuing", not "persuing".

Fixed for you captain.