A fabulous 1934 Chicago Tribune cartoon that has recently been making the rounds in the blogosphere as an example of history sadly repeating itself was marvelously rerun at the paper's website on June 10.
In it, members of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's administration are seen shoveling money out of a wagon with a billboard on the side declaring, "Depleting the resources of the soundest government in the world."
On Wednesday, the Trib reprinted the cartoon with the caption "This is a 1934 Chicago Tribune political cartoon that many say rings true in today's political and economic climate. What do you think?" (full, largely legible print below the fold along with an explanation of the characters uncovered by The Federal Observer, h/t NBer Gary Hall):

The man in the mortarboard flogging the Democratic donkey is Rex Tugwell, the leader of FDR’s “Brain Trust”, a character out of academica. The Brain Trust was supposed to come up with new ideas to help America. The two mortarboard-wearing kids in the wagon represent recent Ivy League college graduates hired to staff the New Deal. The cartoonist from the conservative Chicago Tribune, Mr. Orr, is calling them socialist “pinkos” (term that wasn’t then in use, “pinkies’ is what Orr called them). [...]
The most prominently featured man shoveling money off the wagon is Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace, who was known for his socialist leanings. Most us are aware that FDR confiscated gold in 1934, but most people are not aware that the gold confiscation was a clause in the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1934. It is also important to remember that 90% of the American population lived on farms during the Depression.
The man behind Wallace is Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior and director of the Public Works Administration. As head of the PWA, Ickes had a lot of say on what and where public works projects were built. The biggest of course was the Tennessee Valley Authority. Ickes was well-known for backing many other socialist endeavors. Ickes was also the father of Harold M. Ickes, a key player in the Clinton administration.
The other man behind Wallace was a mystery to me. In fact, I had trouble reading the label on him in the cartoon. That man is Donald Richberg, who was called “assistant president” in the FDR administration. Both he and Ickes came through Chicago politics and were leaders of the Progressive movement there. Both Ickes and Richberg were key players in pushing the National Industrial Recovery Act which imposed fascist codes of conduct on American industry which dictated how key industries in America were to be run. The National Recovery Administration was ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court in 1935, which decision led to FDR’s effort to “pack” the Supreme Court with more cooperative justices.
The significance of this cartoon is that it depicts the visible signs of manipulation by the financial elite that runs America, which was in full control of the country back during the Depression, for decades before that and for the decades leading up to the present.
D. Dial
Pretty amazing how history repeats itself, wouldn't you agree?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Progressive
June 14, 2009 - 14:54 ET by BKeyserThis is what I like most about progressives, they're always drawing on 75 year old policy for new ideas.
Remember during the
June 15, 2009 - 18:32 ET by ReaverRemember during the stimulus bill the democrats kept saying that the republicans had no new ideas? No one in the media ever pointed out that their ideas were just warmed over new deal.
If stupidity got us into this mess,
then why can't it get us out?
--Will Rogers
Glad this is here...like
June 14, 2009 - 15:03 ET by bigtimerGlad this is here...like you said it has been going all over the blogsophere....I've sent that all quite awhile ago now.
Thanks to Gary also for putting this out here.
People never learn it seems.
Btw...lovely that Ickes son is still working with the leftist behind the scenes.
I wonder why the Trib put this out now? hehehe
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
OK, BT.. I confess..
June 14, 2009 - 15:13 ET by Gary HallMy brother, Larry, sent it to me.. I was more than obliged to send it forward. So HT to my bro.
Ickes being there was a trip, indeed. My first glance at it had me looking twice at the date, and wondering how he got into the Obama admin., without me picking up on it. gary
Hey Gary... I remember
June 14, 2009 - 15:27 ET by bigtimerHey Gary...
I remember when that sleaze-ball Ickes was called before congress and I think it was Sen. Lauch Faircloth (sp) who reamed him out, embarrassed him if possible, by his arrogant attitide before the members, that his father would be real proud of him.
It was great!
Anyway...here are some memories...but there is a lot more, as you know.
Wished I had a video of Lauch and Harold.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
bt.. no no no
June 14, 2009 - 15:37 ET by Gary Hallno,no, no. You must remember - the only scandal of the Clinton era was the scandal of the vast right-wing conspiracy. Clinton's business, in the office of the most powerful man in the world - the people's house - with the very young unpaid intern, was only personal; there were no other scandals - and the world was at peace and in economic bliss.
Noel.. "how red the sunrise is getting."
June 14, 2009 - 15:07 ET by Gary HallAlso of note is the character Stalin, off in the background to the right, with the note, "how red the sunrise is getting." Karl Marx is smiling again.
The column in Pravda last week comes to mind, which noted how America has suddenly desended into Marxism - as well as Chavez's recent comments that and Fidel need to look out as Obama is perhaps further left then they.
Difficult to keep up with the acceleration of events, is it not?
(;~> gary
Everything old is new
June 14, 2009 - 15:11 ET by DaBirdEverything old is new again...
not true when say the following...
June 14, 2009 - 17:33 ET by PaarlIt is also important to remember that 90% of the American population lived on farms during the Depression.
///////////////////////////////
not true....much higher than todays 2-3% but no where near 90%
Paarl of Rhodesia
Speaking of farms and it's
June 14, 2009 - 18:03 ET by bigtimerSpeaking of farms and it's a slow day here so far anyway, has anyone seen this.
Pint sized cows....how lovely, now we won't have to worry about so much green-house gases...wonder of they will be free of having to wear those cute little gas capture outfits.
The greenies of course love this....why this solves everything dontcha know.
I just shake my head anymore...what will be next.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Eureka!
June 14, 2009 - 19:21 ET by mizflame98So, that's where those burgers come from.
“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds”
Samuel Adams
mizflame.... ROFL! Spew
June 14, 2009 - 19:37 ET by bigtimermizflame....
ROFL!
Spew alert...
How fitting with my post/link...you have me cracking up laughing here...I've got to share this elsewhere later.
Thank ya gal.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
No problem.
June 15, 2009 - 08:25 ET by mizflame98I hope I didn't make you choke on your drink.
“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds”
Samuel Adams
"Pretty amazing how history
June 14, 2009 - 17:47 ET by R D Helm"Pretty amazing how history repeats itself, wouldn't you agree?"
Yep, but unlike last time we went down this road, I don't think we're coming back from this one.
-Dave
Obama's health care "reform" plan is to blow up the building in order to fix a leak in the roof-Herman Cain
So they were concerned about
June 14, 2009 - 17:55 ET by balboaSo they were concerned about communism back then, and sonofagun if it never happened...
I think it's natural that some would want the government to have more control over things during a time of stress. But it won't ever last. Along will come -- most likely -- a Republican pres and congress who will loosen the reins, and voila! We can start all over again.
bal
June 14, 2009 - 18:38 ET by Noel Sheppardbal,
"So they were concerned about communism back then, and sonofagun if it never happened..."
Actually, they were correctly worried about socialism, and it did happen. After all, this cartoon was created in 1934. The following year, Social Security and Medicaid were created. Of course, you probably don't see them as socialism, but there it is.
Thus began America's path to unrestrained government spending, and there have only been a handful of years since that we didn't run a deficit.
Beyond this, let's understand that when all this socialism started back then, the federal debt was quite small compared to GDP. What should scare even you is that this percentage was already at 65 in 2007 BEFORE we started with all this new spending.
With all the unfunded liabilities associated with SS and Medicare, our socialist Ponzi scheme is headed for a disaster like nothing that's ever happened in this nation.
As such, I find your "it won't ever last...We can start all over again" optimism to be unrealistically rosey. ns
When do you believe this
June 14, 2009 - 20:52 ET by balboaWhen do you believe this disaster will occur, and what will it mean? I mean, are you saying Canadian-style socialism, or French, or 1939 Germany?
And if by the midterms we're even further along to this disaster, won't everyone right of Bachmann win their election?
bal
June 14, 2009 - 21:21 ET by Noel Sheppardbal,
Tough to tell. This isn't a problem that just started. We're at roughly 80 straight years of foolish spending that comes to a head when the baby boomers retire. As such, I'm not blaming this on Obama OR Democrats. Many presidents and BOTH parties have brought us to this point.
Unfortunately, this recent bout of spending is just unconscionable, and will create debt expansions in the next five to ten years like nothing we've seen since the Depression and WWII. As this is atop all the debt created since then, I think the camel's back is about to break, and with the Democrats in control, their answer will be to just continue to raise taxes which will further exacerbate the problem.
When does this hit a head? I don't know. As the stock and real estate collapses will delay many retirements, it's possible Social Security and Medicare's bankruptcies will also be delayed. As a result, we could have a period of time where more people are paying in, and less taking out, than we expected just two years ago.
But, the other problem is that many Americans will surely be changed by what happened last year, and will likely spend within their means. As the past two economic expansions have been based on people spending MUCH MORE than they made, what kind of recovery will come from folks spending more wisely?
Even with all the free credit and foolish spending during this last recovery, the GDP only grew at an above average rate (3 percent) once. Just imagine what the economy would have done if housing prices hadn't exploded and people weren't able to spend their equity.
What this means to me is that even if we do see a recovery, it likely will be very weak as will tax receipts thereby producing continually expanding deficits and debt. ns
Is the problem then that
June 14, 2009 - 21:29 ET by balboaIs the problem then that Obama is spending too much while also having government ownership of too much?
We've seen substantial government intervention in the economy twice now, right? In times of economic peril. Isn't it a safety precaution of sorts to have the government more involved when things are shaky?
bal
June 14, 2009 - 21:48 ET by Noel Sheppardbal,
The more serious long-term problem is the explosion in deficit spending on top of 80 years of such. If we had been honest about what happened during the Depression, we wouldn't have repeated the same mistake. After all, it wasn't the spending that got us out of the Depression. It was WWII. As even most liberal economists agree with this, why did we repeat it?
At this point in time, I agree with those who believe we rushed into Iraq. Given that recent precedent of costly capriciousness, why didn't we do more research after last fall's financial collapse before committing so much money? Wasn't this especially logical given how little of the money was destined to be spent this year? If that was the case, what was the rush?
Why didn't we create a panel of liberal and conservative economists to thoroughly analyze what worked during the Depression, and what didn't, and use that as a roadmap? Wouldn't that have made more sense than passing a $787 billion stimulus AND a $410 billion increase to already approved FY 2009 spending AND approving a 2010 budget with even MORE spending? ns
I completely agree. I don't
June 14, 2009 - 22:27 ET by balboaI completely agree. I don't want Obama doing anything other than saying, Let's get together, get the smartest people in the room -- not the smartest democrats -- the smartest people. But so far I haven't seen that. I want to see more progress, less fluff.
I'm not an economics person, but spending THIS much doesn't seem like a good idea.
bal
June 14, 2009 - 23:52 ET by MrShyI want to see more progress, less fluff.
And what a shocker, bal. I'm hearing this from my lib friends all around me more and more.
I'm trying hard not to gloat here, but we weren't being right-wing lunatics at all. We were trying to warn you about this do-nothing con artist.
It will forever amaze me that there wasn't enough proof in the pudding with this guy. Stunning.
You're the next contestant on...
THE MESSIAH IS... LEFT !!
ACORN and the Propagandists in Obama's Cult are the Difference.
June 14, 2009 - 20:07 ET by farstar99The checks and balances are gone now.
And fortunately for us, somebody named McCarthy came along to keep it from happening.
He was a drunk, and he made things up, but we now know, thanks to Venona and other sources, that he was right. There were communists in our government and Hollywood, and to the eternal anger of the communists still in our society, his campaigning exposed them in time.
farstar... Yep... I
June 14, 2009 - 20:19 ET by bigtimerfarstar...
Yep...
I think recently only Michelle Bachmann has been the only one to dare mention communists in congress etc.
...and the leftist msm made hay out of it, tried to destroy her, starting with Matthews since this brouhaha started on his show, and the rest of msnbc followed suit.
She defeated all their attempts.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Nope
June 14, 2009 - 20:34 ET by kilrod"So they were concerned about communism back then, and sonofagun if it never happened..."
Nope, then along came WWII, the death of millions of people, whole countries destoyed, then how many years of the "cold war". After WWII, communism had to take a back seat to democracy, and democracy had a time in the sun leading to the failure of the soviet union. Unfortunately during this "time in the sun" the dimocraps got us involved in a little place called Viet Nam, they ushered in the now failed "great society" and communism was cloned from the afterbirth of every failed socialist state in the world, which brings us to where we are today with the obamination of o-Dumb-uh and the socialist dimocrap party destroying the "Good Ole U S of A", and son-of-a-gun it's happening as we speak.
kilrod
Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier
Progressive no thanks
June 14, 2009 - 19:50 ET by Cho Yi FanI don like anything about Progressives.I feel that is the job of the Federal Government to deliver my mail protect my shores and stay the hell out of my life.But then. I was born and raised in the 50's and I haven't been brainwashed to believe that I should depend on anyone else but myself. The government doesn't owe me a living. I am a dinosaur.
Cho... You're not that
June 14, 2009 - 19:56 ET by bigtimerCho...
You're not that only dinosaur.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Thanks bigtimer...But
June 14, 2009 - 20:43 ET by Cho Yi FanI may not be the only dinosaur but I am afraid that after the boomers are gone the generations to come will not have a clue how to be self sufficient. I raised my kids to be independent.They are in their 20's and they have begun to ask me why they are busting their butts trying to succeed when so many sit on their butts and take handouts. My answers don't help them feel any better about their futures. I think that if we don't offload Obama in the next election and get someone to be the POTUS that can get us back on track this nation as we know and have known it will be lost.
It is shocking to me to look back to 1970 and see between then and now how much intrusion into the simplest things in our daily life the federal government has wrought. From your light bulbs to how many gallons toilets can hold Uncle Stalin has made some rule to govern it. I am just waiting for the Obama health plan which I expect will be a combination of Logan's Run and Soylent Green because there are just to many Boomers getting old and dragging the system down. Never mind that we paid in the brunt of Medicare/ Medicaid during our younger working years. When the time has come to pay SS and Medicare to the boomers suddenly the government says that we the boomers are draining the system.
Over all I don't feel good about the future of this country and so I have shut off Obama because he is depressing to listen to.I am 59 and at least I can remember a time when this country had its s**t in one sock and we had an economy that was the envy of the world. Then we had leaders (except for Carter) that no matter what their party was they had some idea of how to lead. Those presidents were not the American Idol president-which is what Obama really is. But then that's what happens when people vote with their emotions and don't take the time to go beyond a biased media and find out who the candidate really is.I think that many have buyers remorse.
Cho.... I don't want to
June 14, 2009 - 20:46 ET by bigtimerCho....
I don't want to sound repetitious, but really you said it all.
We feel the same here in our home, same with our kids, although they are older, I am worried sick about this country, it has made me ill watching what is happening at break-neck speed now to us.
We are losing so many freedoms...daily it seems now. Ianger with the controls they are forcing on us, let alone the cost, it is not sustainable.
Have you seen this? This is another example of how much I fear what is happening to us, our free thoughts, speech are going rapidly.
I feel the youth are going to have to learn to be tough and survive....this cannot last, one way of the other this will not stand and things will have to change.
I'm rambling too much here...just thank you for your post.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I am not suprised
June 14, 2009 - 21:55 ET by Cho Yi FanBigtimer:
Checked the link that you sent.I must say that 'm not surprised that something like that is happening.The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 on the surface sounds like something good thing that will keep us safe.But after reading through it it seems that it could be twisted very easily for political purposes and to shut down the opposition.I am not some conspiracy nut I just have great concern about what I see the government doing and the direction that the country is headed.However,what is happenings with this POTUS becoming very deja vu.
The situation that is developing here today is beginning to parrallel the same what happened in Germany in 1933. Then the depression and a financial crisis left society depressed and people needed help.On the scene comes a charismatic leader who promises hope and change. He starts out by nationalized the economy ,buisness,the banks and very fiber of society.Then too there was a state run media that only said positive things about the leader.Anyone who spoke against him was persecuted. People who had ideas that the government thought were dangerous was rounded up and interned. If you have studied history-not the revisionist type- then you know the rest. Don't know how far this POTUS is going to go but the current government scenario has great potential for all things bad.If you can see it the big picture it is chilling.
Toughness
June 15, 2009 - 10:02 ET by dvdaughtryI feel the youth are going to have to learn to be tough and survive....
I am turning 30 in October and I see the same thing amoung my age group.
You might be referencing the generation before me as well. I have some neices and nephews that like the easy way out too. Good kids, but can be a little wimpy at times.
I never remembered struggling with simple things like kids do these days. For example, I was playing old video games (original Nintendo old) with my nephew last week. When I was his age I didn't have anyone tell me how to kill this monster or when to jump. These are old games mind you (when the controller only had two buttons).
He wanted me to tell him what to do. I didn't and he eventually got it, but after way to many tries.
You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?
Lemming effect. Then as
June 14, 2009 - 21:46 ET by RR GOPLemming effect.
Then as now, most Americans are all for it. Plus, you have to remember that we've been taught since grade school about how wonderful FDR's New Deal was. It's simply a widely-held assumption that Hoover sucked and that FDR's programs saved America from ruin.
I dare anyone out there to insult FDR in front of a family member or friend who was alive and cognizant back then.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
I didn't buy it when I was 7
June 15, 2009 - 01:15 ET by Cho Yi FanRR GOP wrote:
"Plus, you have to remember that we've been taught since grade school about how wonderful FDR's New Deal was."
I just never liked or worshiped FDR. Maybe it was grandpa's many rants in the 50's about Roosevelt trying to turn us into"Red Russia" Those happened because during the depression FDR started offering people relief-today it's called welfare.Grandpa was really against what he called "taking charity" to support his family. Because of that I just never bought into the FDR was god stuff. Even as a kid I thought he was a bad guy.Eleanor Roosevelt always seemed pompous too didn't like here either. Today I know that grandpa was right.
our govt.
June 15, 2009 - 09:41 ET by jessieHjessieH This is our govt. Look how long it took to bring OUR country back to prosperity...............You forgot to mention one thing- Notice that they are riding in a " brand new, fuel efficient, convertible straight from the assembly line of Govt. Motors!!!"