Obama-- the second coming of Jimmy Carter

Don't soil Carter's good name. Obama has not lead on any important issues.

Carter is the only US President who had the balls to stand up against big oil. He is the only US President who didn't lie to Americans - to the contrary, he told them they had to make sacrifices as patriots so that future Americans would not be held hostage to expensive oil. He asked America to build a moonshot around moving a portion of its energy use off petroleum. He called on the country to unite behind an alternative future where high gas costs did not cripple the country. Meanwhile, big oil went in search of a political party. It went looking for candidates, think tanks, radio, and TV. It became the first large funder of movement conservatism, which would eventually move business profits into political outcomes with more success than could ever be dreamed.

Enter Ronald Reagan, the first candidate of big oil. Reagan got elected and convinced America that Carter was simply wrong on energy. Reagan did what Washington does best: lie. He told Americans to live large. Consume big. Energy is not a problem. Granted, he made minor rhetorical concessions to the energy problem, but his policies told a different story. His first act as president was to tear down the solar panels on the White House roof. His message was clear: America does not conserve. America does not sacrifice. America does not change it's reckless consumption for anyone -- including nature. Here is where Reagan used his strategic relationship with the evangelicals. "He will Provide."

Americans - lead by Reagan and Big Oil - we're like sheep being lead to slaughter. They got rid of science and created a 30 year consumption bubble based on a completely false energy premise.

So yes, we listened to Reagan and we increased our consumption and decreased all the research and effort that was leading to a less petrol-intensive future. We spent 30 years expanding our suburbs, building the largest, most costly network of roads and homes this world has ever seen. We built gas guzzlers and McMansions. We did this on the premise of cheap energy. Without cheap energy, our glorious postwar expansion starts to look like the greatest misallocation of resources in history. We got fooled into believing it was morning in America when we should have been rolling up our sleeves and making the tough transition to a sustainable energy future. We became catatonic consumers marching blindly into an energy void, lead by an actor who was being paid by special interests to ignore the greatest national crisis in generations.

Guess what happened after Reagan left office.

The oil started to do what Carter predicted: disappear, as China and India put more pressure on rapidly dwindling reserves. There were and are limits to nature, despite the conservative belief that science is a liberal conspiracy.

It is what it is. Meaning: the cost of energy has skyrocketed and we don't have a plan B.

We let a B rate Actor put us to sleep for 30 years - now it's too late. We are in a for a bumpy landing.

America got punk'd in 1980.
 
Last edited:
McGurn: They Once Loved Jimmy, Too - WSJ.com

In a polarized nation, on the eve of another divisive contest for the White House, those seeking a unified America are not without hope. For amid the partisan bickering, there remains one principle on which all Americans are agreed: Any comparison to Jimmy Carter is always and everywhere a put-down.

Given Mr. Carter's Democratic affiliation, it's mostly Republicans and conservatives who traffic in Jimmy Carter allusions. That makes for something of a yawn, as Mitt Romney is finding out with his claim that the community organizer from Chicago is worse than the peanut farmer from Georgia. More in the man-bites-dog category is when one of Mr. Obama's own sticks the Carter tag on him.

So it must have stung when the New York Times's Maureen Dowd recently quoted an unnamed Democratic senator moaning that "we are watching him turn into Jimmy Carter right before our eyes."


The full text of this story according to your link is a remarkable comparison to Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.

She was not alone. Eric Alterman earlier this year weighed in with a column in U.S. News whose headline declares, "Obama's Awful '70s Show Echoes Jimmy Carter." The unkindest cut of all comes from Zbigniew Brzezinski—Jimmy Carter's national security adviser and one of the first to hop aboard the Obama bandwagon—who on MSNBC last month brought up the word most associated with Mr. Carter, though he never actually said it: "malaise."

Many have noticed this trend. Few appear to appreciate that the record shows an even stronger parallel between Messrs. Obama and Carter. For there was a day—especially after he finished ahead in the 1976 Iowa caucuses—that Mr. Carter was hailed as the intelligent outsider who was going to clean up Washington and forever change American politics.

We can chart that change in the pages of the New York Times. After Iowa, we see an establishment forced to abandon its preferred candidates begin to fall in love. Three decades before Mr. Obama told his people "We are the ones we've been waiting for," Times columnist Tom Wicker wrote that "Mr. Carter seems to have made the restoration of the people's faith in themselves his primary campaign strategy."

Anthony Lewis noted how listeners come away "struck most of all by how smart Carter is," and he found the Georgian's bid for the presidency "a little reminiscent of John Kennedy's emergence in 1960." Picking up the theme, R.W. Apple likened Mr. Carter to JFK in the way he persuaded skeptics that his faith was no threat to the separation of church and state. After interviewing the candidate "who saw it as his purpose to save America," Norman Mailer told readers of the Times magazine "the wonder of it was that he was believable."

Then there's realist theologian Reinhold Niebuhr. During the 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama proved his intellectual chops when, in response to a question about Niebuhr from a New York Times columnist, he replied, "I love him. He's one of my favorite philosophers." The column went on to describe Mr. Obama's campaign as "an attempt to thread the Niebuhrian needle."

Alas, even here Jimmy Carter got there first. The frontispiece of his campaign biography "Why Not the Best" features one of his favorite quotations from Niebuhr: "The sad duty of politics is to establish justice in a sinful world." Scotty Reston duly noted Mr. Carter's admiration for Niebuhr in a Times column written when the future President Obama was just 14 years old.

In other words, it's not just the way President Obama's policies have not worked out that invites the Jimmy Carter parallel. It's also the over-the-top praise each received before entering office. In both 1976 and 2008, each Democrat was presented as the kind of smart, cool, new politico who was going to—fill in the cliché—"transcend politics as we know it," "appeal across traditional lines," "bring America together," etc.

Ironically, here Mr. Romney has a case, for some of the differences between the two presidents favor Mr. Carter. Faced with raging inflation and a declining dollar, President Carter appointed Paul Volcker chairman of the Federal Reserve. He supported deregulation. Most of all, in contrast to President Obama, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize because he wasn't George W. Bush, President Carter actually earned his, at least for the Camp David Accords that brought about peace between Israel and Egypt.

Mr. Obama can't be blamed for the excesses that saw him hailed as the new FDR, the new JFK or the new Lincoln, or for the Norwegian committee that bestowed upon him a Nobel. He can be held to account for encouraging them: by delivering a campaign speech in Berlin, by accepting a prize he hadn't earned, by breaking out not only a Lincoln quotation but the Lincoln china and the Lincoln Bible for his inauguration.

An American politician steeped in—dare we say it?—Niebuhrian realism would have appreciated that no president could live up to such hype. And such a man would not be surprised to find that people who once hailed him as the reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln are now dismissing him as the second coming of Jimmy Carter.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...6496461072142314.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
 
Last edited:
Please don't insult Jimmy Carter. He may have been a poor President, but Obama is in a league of his own.
 
Obama-- the second coming of Jimmy Carter

I wish. President Carter was/is a good man.

Sure he was a good man, but he was no leader and certainly should never have been a President- the same for Obama, I am sure Obama is a good man, but you need to be a leader. Obama and Carter are both extremely left wing liberals and our country is still center-right- we are not socialists and the great majority of Americans just won't go there. Just look at what has happened in Greece and now in London, soon to be happening in Italy and Spain, next stop the riots in the U.S. You can not promise more than you can deliver, and think that the people who became dependent on all those governments are not going to riot when the gravy train ends.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, the gospel of envy and the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill

" The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher

Both Jimmy Carter and Barach Obama are socialists, thinking that they can solve all that ills America with just more government involvement and control over our personal finances if they can just confiscate more of the private sector dollar. They can't it's a proven failure and instead of Obama following Clintons lead and moving to the center after the mid-terms, he wants to double down on failure.
 
Last edited:
Obama-- the second coming of Jimmy Carter

I really wish you would not insult Carter like that.

Obama is a continuation of Bush.
 
Don't soil Carter's good name. Obama has not lead on any important issues.

Carter is the only US President who had the balls to stand up against big oil. He is the only US President who didn't lie to Americans - to the contrary, he told them they had to make sacrifices as patriots so that future Americans would not be held hostage to expensive oil. He asked America to build a moonshot around moving a portion of its energy use off petroleum. He called on the country to unite behind an alternative future where high gas costs did not cripple the country. Meanwhile, big oil went in search of a political party. It went looking for candidates, think tanks, radio, and TV. It became the first large funder of movement conservatism, which would eventually move business profits into political outcomes with more success than could ever be dreamed.

Enter Ronald Reagan, the first candidate of big oil. Reagan got elected and convinced America that Carter was simply wrong on energy. Reagan did what Washington does best: lie. He told Americans to live large. Consume big. Energy is not a problem. Granted, he made minor rhetorical concessions to the energy problem, but his policies told a different story. His first act as president was to tear down the solar panels on the White House roof. His message was clear: America does not conserve. America does not sacrifice. America does not change it's reckless consumption for anyone -- including nature. Here is where Reagan used his strategic relationship with the evangelicals. "He will Provide."

Americans - lead by Reagan and Big Oil - we're like sheep being lead to slaughter. They got rid of science and created a 30 year consumption bubble based on a completely false energy premise.

So yes, we listened to Reagan and we increased our consumption and decreased all the research and effort that was leading to a less petrol-intensive future. We spent 30 years expanding our suburbs, building the largest, most costly network of roads and homes this world has ever seen. We built gas guzzlers and McMansions. We did this on the premise of cheap energy. Without cheap energy, our glorious postwar expansion starts to look like the greatest misallocation of resources in history. We got fooled into believing it was morning in America when we should have been rolling up our sleeves and making the tough transition to a sustainable energy future. We became catatonic consumers marching blindly into an energy void, lead by an actor who was being paid by special interests to ignore the greatest national crisis in generations.

Guess what happened after Reagan left office.

The oil started to do what Carter predicted: disappear, as China and India put more pressure on rapidly dwindling reserves. There were and are limits to nature, despite the conservative belief that science is a liberal conspiracy.

It is what it is. Meaning: the cost of energy has skyrocketed and we don't have a plan B.

We let a B rate Actor put us to sleep for 30 years - now it's too late. We are in a for a bumpy landing.

America got punk'd in 1980.

Reagan created 20 million new jobs, after Carter handed him a country in a deep, deep recession with 17% inflation. Then he ended the cold war with Russia without firing one single shot. You can take that to the bank. He was the greatest President of the century and even Democrats backed his Presidency. Obama will use Reagan in a lot of his speeches to attempt to make those Reagan Democrats think that he is like him. He is a 180 from Reagan.
 
Last edited:
Obama-- the second coming of Jimmy Carter

I wish. President Carter was/is a good man.

Good man?

Yes.

Good president? :eusa_whistle:

It is said, though, that in building those Habitat Houses they do not allow him to determine whether anything is plumb or on the level. Just hammer screws (not nails; it takes him longer to drive a screw with a hammer, hence out of the way of the workers).
 
Both great men. Carter had bad luck- the Iran Hostage crisis killed him, along with Teddy and the Dems- he wanted austerity, a la Raygun (nobody knows that). Obama knows D.C. much better. Will go down as great if he can get reelected. Today's GOP is a total BS nightmare...

Yeah it's all bad luck. If it weren't for the Japanese earthquake and Arab Spring his Stimulus package would have worked.

If it weren't for ATM machines there would be more jobs.

Yes its all bad luck :lol:
 
:lol:
Maple - The multi spammer of I Hate Obama Threads

I don't hate Obama, I just don't like his agenda, socialism. You and your liberal buds refuse to see the facts on the issues, now he is the first President in U.S history to be DOWNGRADED.:lol::lol: What a record of total failure, hell, it's worse than Jimmy Carter.
 
I wish he was....but Obama is more like a Clinton

You must be a young whiper-snapper who was not there to see the comparison- believe me Obama is no Clinton, I would pay money to have Clinton back in there, at least he understood economics.
 
I wish he was....but Obama is more like a Clinton

You must be a young whiper-snapper who was not there to see the comparison- believe me Obama is no Clinton, I would pay money to have Clinton back in there, at least he understood economics.

How so? Clinton signed the deregulation bill that is the major reason we are in this mess.
 
Both great men. Carter had bad luck- the Iran Hostage crisis killed him, along with Teddy and the Dems- he wanted austerity, a la Raygun (nobody knows that). Obama knows D.C. much better. Will go down as great if he can get reelected. Today's GOP is a total BS nightmare...

It was so bad during the Carter years that Ted Kennedy challenged him on a primary. It's worse now, and if Obama was not black he would be challenged from some in his own party, but they won't because they would be called a racist.

Now- go ahead and call me a racist. I know you will. But that's a fact and one you can believe in.
 
Both great men. Carter had bad luck- the Iran Hostage crisis killed him, along with Teddy and the Dems- he wanted austerity, a la Raygun (nobody knows that). Obama knows D.C. much better. Will go down as great if he can get reelected. Today's GOP is a total BS nightmare...

It was so bad during the Carter years that Ted Kennedy challenged him on a primary. It's worse now, and if Obama was not black he would be challenged from some in his own party, but they won't because they would be called a racist.

Now- go ahead and call me a racist. I know you will. But that's a fact and one you can believe in.

How was Carter years bad?
 
Both great men. Carter had bad luck- the Iran Hostage crisis killed him, along with Teddy and the Dems- he wanted austerity, a la Raygun (nobody knows that). Obama knows D.C. much better. Will go down as great if he can get reelected. Today's GOP is a total BS nightmare...

It was so bad during the Carter years that Ted Kennedy challenged him on a primary. It's worse now, and if Obama was not black he would be challenged from some in his own party, but they won't because they would be called a racist.

Now- go ahead and call me a racist. I know you will. But that's a fact and one you can believe in.

How was Carter years bad?

:cuckoo:
 
Both great men. Carter had bad luck- the Iran Hostage crisis killed him, along with Teddy and the Dems- he wanted austerity, a la Raygun (nobody knows that). Obama knows D.C. much better. Will go down as great if he can get reelected. Today's GOP is a total BS nightmare...

It was so bad during the Carter years that Ted Kennedy challenged him on a primary. It's worse now, and if Obama was not black he would be challenged from some in his own party, but they won't because they would be called a racist.

Now- go ahead and call me a racist. I know you will. But that's a fact and one you can believe in.

How was Carter years bad?
carter was given an unimaginable fiasco with the legacy of watergate, the ford pardons, the economic legacy of vietnam (aka "iraq: the prequel"), the terrible state of the middle east at that time, and obviously the iranian hostage crisis. i'd love to hear a right-winger tell me what carter would do about the hostage crisis that was different than what carter did.
 

Forum List

Back
Top