Obama = Carter Part II ??

[Sinatra]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

yawn.


post something with wit or humor. nobody wants a hissy-tory lesson

yawn

 

[Sinatra]

yawn.


post something with wit or humor. nobody wants a hissy-tory lesson

yawn

So you don't deny that Carter was a disaster - good.

Then perhaps open your eyes just a bit to the seeming link between he and Obama.

Is that a legitimate link or not?

 

[sealybobo]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

 

[Sinatra]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

Your post is an abomination to common sense!

Be very grateful you live in a nation that affords you the protection to be so inept and careless with the concepts of truth and logic and basic understanding of American history.

And you would do well to familiarize yourself with President Kennedy - by today's political standards he would be at the very least, a conservative Democrat, or quite possibly a moderate Republican.

The Democratic Party of today is not the Democrat Party of Kennedy's era!

The tone of all your comments have the trappings of one who believes the twin towers were brought down by the government - true?

 

[toomuchtime_]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

Carter's problem was not the Republicans but the Democrats who controlled both Houses of Congress and thought he was not liberal enough. In 1980, Carter was beaten by Reagan only after being mauled by Ted Kennedy in a brutal primary battle. Obama is likely to face the same kind of power struggle from Congressional Democrats. The stimulus bill the House passed is clearly not the kind of bill Obama had wanted, and as word has leaked out that that Geithner, Summers and Bernake are considering a new rescue plan for the banks, Dodd and Frank have told the administration to not even bother asking for more money for the banks.

Of course, much of this is Obama's fault. Instead of sending down to Congress the stimulus bill he wanted, he deferred to Pelosi by only sending a broad outline of the bill and leaving it up to her to decide what the specifics should be, and by including pet projects that had nothing to do with a stimulus, Nancy set the bill up to be challenged by the Republicans. Before Obama tries to show the Republicans or the Iranians that he has the backbone of steel Biden claimed for him, he needs to grow a pair big enough to stand up to Nancy or he'll spend the next four years as a figurehead or cheerleader while the Democrats and Republicans battle out the issues in Congress without paying much attention to him.

The last liberal president before Carter was LBJ, arguably the most liberal president America has ever had. Kennedy was a politician who depended on support from labor unions but there is nothing to suggest he was liberal himself.

 

[Sinatra]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

Carter's problem was not the Republicans but the Democrats who controlled both Houses of Congress and thought he was not liberal enough. In 1980, Carter was beaten by Reagan only after being mauled by Ted Kennedy in a brutal primary battle. Obama is likely to face the same kind of power struggle from Congressional Democrats. The stimulus bill the House passed is clearly not the kind of bill Obama had wanted, and as word has leaked out that that Geithner, Summers and Bernake are considering a new rescue plan for the banks, Dodd and Frank have told the administration to not even bother asking for more money for the banks.

Of course, much of this is Obama's fault. Instead of sending down to Congress the stimulus bill he wanted, he deferred to Pelosi by only sending a broad outline of the bill and leaving it up to her to decide what the specifics should be, and by including pet projects that had nothing to do with a stimulus, Nancy set the bill up to be challenged by the Republicans. Before Obama tries to show the Republicans or the Iranians that he has the backbone of steel Biden claimed for him, he needs to grow a pair big enough to stand up to Nancy or he'll spend the next four years as a figurehead or cheerleader while the Democrats and Republicans battle out the issues in Congress without paying much attention to him.

The last liberal president before Carter was LBJ, arguably the most liberal president America has ever had. Kennedy was a politician who depended on support from labor unions but there is nothing to suggest he was liberal himself.

Thank you! Finally someone who has studied a bit of 20th Century history.

Like Carter, Obama faces a very leftist element within the Democrat Party - one that may very well be more leftist than even in Carter's time.

The chaos between the Obama administration and the Pelosi Democrat-controlled House is a perfect example of this challenge Obama faces.

Thus, the quite apt description of Obama = Carter II.

 

[sealybobo]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

Carter's problem was not the Republicans .

I truly believe that HW Bush, CIA DIRECTOR at the time, made a deal with the Iranians to keep the hostages until after the election.

That's why he was made VP.

If you search, you'll find out that the Bush families assets were frozen for dealing with the Nazi's in WW2 and it is clear today that they do business with the Bin Ladins.

Carter was winning until the Iran hostage thing.

And then later Reagan/Ollie North got busted on the Iran/Contra scandal.

Do you have to be a conspiracy theorist to figure this out?

This is where the term October Surprise comes from.

PS. The media isn't liberal either. They may appear to be at times, but there are certain things the corporate/mainstream media just will never tell you. One thing is that Bush was lying about WMD's.

Another one would be that it was Chaney sending anthrax out. Who got Anthraxed? Daschel & Leahy? Two men trying to stop the Patriot Act.

And what evidence did Chaney have that it was Saddam who was mailing out anthrax? So there is proof that at least Chaney is a big fat fucking liar.

Plus they said they could have never imagined flying planes into buildings, but then we find out they were briefed on exactly that.

I know, I'm

 

[sealybobo]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

Your post is an abomination to common sense!

Be very grateful you live in a nation that affords you the protection to be so inept and careless with the concepts of truth and logic and basic understanding of American history.

And you would do well to familiarize yourself with President Kennedy - by today's political standards he would be at the very least, a conservative Democrat, or quite possibly a moderate Republican.

The Democratic Party of today is not the Democrat Party of Kennedy's era!

The tone of all your comments have the trappings of one who believes the twin towers were brought down by the government - true?

Haha! Wait till you read my previous post. I do think the Gov knew about 9-11. The GOP gov that is. PNAC baby!!!

Also, the left isn't as left as you think. You only think they are far left because you and guys like Karl Rove start every conversation from the far right. There are books written on how the GOP moved the country to the right.

And the country has moved back to the left of center. But you'll say they just moved to the center. But that's because you guys moved far right. And you are really the moral minority, not majority. But you speak loudly so people think there are a lot of you. There are, just in the red states. Blue states are more liberal than you think. Not as liberal as I would like, but better than you think. And we finally won over Ohio & Colorado. Welcome home boys!!!

PS. The income tx is unconstitutional. Congress was bribed in 1913 to sign the Fed Reserve Act. That's when the bankers took over the country. We haven't been free since. You only think you are. How much debt are you in? They own you!

 

[Sinatra]

I will say it again - some of you in here should be very grateful you live in a country so powerful as to allow such a lack of historical insight and basic common decency to be part of the collective discourse.

You are amusing, but on some level it must bother you to know you are not taken seriously.

Then again, perhaps not...

 

[jillian]

I have a better idea....perhaps wingnuts should find something that's actually constructive to do besides making unfounded comparisons....

because they felt like.

or perhaps, you can tell me what obama's positions are that are carter's but aren't Clinton's.

 

[Sinatra]

I have a better idea....perhaps wingnuts should find something that's actually constructive to do besides making unfounded comparisons....

because they felt like.

or perhaps, you can tell me what obama's positions are that are carter's but aren't Clinton's.

Ah, the term "wingnut".

Perhaps you could start again, and provide a post with a bit more potential to make a point worthy of discussion?

I am certain you are capable of doing better than that example, so will wait a bit to hear back from you.

 

[sealybobo]

I will say it again - some of you in here should be very grateful you live in a country so powerful as to allow such a lack of historical insight and basic common decency to be part of the collective discourse.

You are amusing, but on some level it must bother you to know you are not taken seriously.

Then again, perhaps not...

You mean, "some of us should be greatful we don't live in china, because the chinese government will murder/imprison you for speaking out against the government".

And in many cases, the protester is telling the truth.

The government, and you, don't probably care when someone rambles on about something that isn't possibly true. I must be striking a nerve with you for you to be threatening me like you are.

Should I be worried? I was when Bush/Chaney/Delay were in charge. But not anymore. Obama works for us, Bush worked against us.

PS. It is my/our government. I'll speak of it any way I want. But yes, I am glad to be free.

Or at least appear to be free.

Do you think Ron Paul is a liar/nutjob? He agrees with me.

You need to get your hands on Freedom to Fascism. Anyone who has not seen it is under informed. Ron Paul is interviewed, and so are former IRS agents/directors.

Watch the dvd and then come to a conclusion. You only think you are free. You are not. Have you heard the GOP wants to put a chip in every American, yet at the same time let illegals flood in to the country? Watch the dvd and see the defense contractor be interviewed by Fox News.

I have too much information to be intimidated or embarrassed by you, suggesting I am a conspiracy theorist. You call me that while the rich conspire against us.

How the Federal Reserve Runs the US - Part II

Why don't you do some research on the Guilded Age, Robber Barons, Desaster Capitalism, Great Depression, how Hitler used the same game plan Bush used to convince his citizens to follow him into hell, etc. History repeats itself. And people who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

Baron M.A. Rothschild understood when he once said: "Give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws." They knew the wisdom of what's stated in Proverbs 22:7 as well: "The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."


But you are right. It isn't right for me to complain about the politicians. George Carlin agrees with you:

"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. F*ck Hope.'"

 

[Angel Heart]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

He couldn't LEAD. That was the issue. He wasn't a true leader. Obama is showing the same signs. His party is in charge just like Carter. But he can't get them to follow his lead.

If the Congress was in Republican control you might be able to say that but they are not.

 

[sealybobo]

I have a better idea....perhaps wingnuts should find something that's actually constructive to do besides making unfounded comparisons....

because they felt like.

or perhaps, you can tell me what obama's positions are that are carter's but aren't Clinton's.

Ah, the term "wingnut".

Perhaps you could start again, and provide a post with a bit more potential to make a point worthy of discussion?

I am certain you are capable of doing better than that example, so will wait a bit to hear back from you.

I love the cocky arrogance of this guy.

 

[Alpha1]

yawn.


post something with wit or humor. nobody wants a hissy-tory lesson

yawn

A little boy says to his mother, "Mommy, how come I'm black and you're white?"

His mother replied, "Don't even go there! From what I can remember about that fucking party, you're lucky you don't bark!"

 

[toomuchtime_]

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

Carter's problem was not the Republicans .

I truly believe that HW Bush, CIA DIRECTOR at the time, made a deal with the Iranians to keep the hostages until after the election.

That's why he was made VP.

If you search, you'll find out that the Bush families assets were frozen for dealing with the Nazi's in WW2 and it is clear today that they do business with the Bin Ladins.

Carter was winning until the Iran hostage thing.

And then later Reagan/Ollie North got busted on the Iran/Contra scandal.

Do you have to be a conspiracy theorist to figure this out?

This is where the term October Surprise comes from.

PS. The media isn't liberal either. They may appear to be at times, but there are certain things the corporate/mainstream media just will never tell you. One thing is that Bush was lying about WMD's.

Another one would be that it was Chaney sending anthrax out. Who got Anthraxed? Daschel & Leahy? Two men trying to stop the Patriot Act.

And what evidence did Chaney have that it was Saddam who was mailing out anthrax? So there is proof that at least Chaney is a big fat fucking liar.

Plus they said they could have never imagined flying planes into buildings, but then we find out they were briefed on exactly that.

I know, I'm

I won't discuss your mental health, but your post is made up entirely of speculations aimed at demonizing Republicans and excusing Democrats of any responsibility for anything that went wrong.

Getting back to the topic of the thread, Carter, like Obama, campaigned on the promise of change against a badly bruised Republican Party after an unpopular war and amid growing economic woes and the Democrats won both Houses of Congress as well as the White House. The Congressional Democrats then clamored to dismantle much of the security apparatus that Democrat and Republican presidents had built up since WWII, and despite falling government revenues they demanded Carter support expensive social welfare programs. So far the parallels are inescapable.

Carter who was less liberal than many of the Party's leaders was caught between impossible demands from the Congressional Democrats and staunch opposition from the Republicans, and he was finally done in by his own naiveté and clumsiness in dealing with worsening conditions in Iran and with the Soviet Union. Now Obama can "Carter out" in four years or he can quickly learn that the first thing he must do is assert control over his own party so that he will not always be playing defense against Congressional Democrats as well as Republicans and set ideology aside in favor of taking a pragmatic approach to encouraging the economy to recover from the recession as well as the underlying financial crisis and to deal with foreign policy issues in a way that will best advance America's interests even if such actions would seem to violate his own personal beliefs about justice.

Carter failed at the first and third of these items and he was skewered by liberal Democrats for taking a pragmatic approach to the economy. So far, Obama has failed to take control of the Party and we don't yet know what his approach to the economy or foreign policy will be.

 

[Truthmatters]

Real Time Economics : Volcker: I Endorse Obama

He appointed the man who killed stagfaltion.

Ford has more blood on his hands for creating the stagflation than Cater does.

 

[sealybobo]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

He couldn't LEAD. That was the issue. He wasn't a true leader. Obama is showing the same signs. His party is in charge just like Carter. But he can't get them to follow his lead.

If the Congress was in Republican control you might be able to say that but they are not.

Bush and Delay got their agenda thru because of 9-11. If the Dems didn't go along, they were called "unpatriotic".

And Bush emptied the treasury almost exclusively through Defense, so it was easy to say, "look, the Dems aren't supporting the troops".

So the Dems have to get better at playing politics and the GOP certainly need to learn better how to govern.

PS. Give it time. You are already ready to call Obama a failure but it took you 8 years to realize Bush sucked? See my George Carlin quote?

"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. F*ck Hope.'"

 

[Sinatra]

After the spectacle of failure this past couple weeks, folks are starting to wonder if this kid Obama is gonna be Carter Part II.

For those of you who can recall the dark days of the Carter administration, is it back to the future with Obama?

Yes, the GOP set Carter up and would not allow him to govern.

He was too liberal.

That's why Clinton was a centrist.

Last liberal before Carter was Kennedy, and you see what the GOP did to him.

So Obama has to be careful. Yes he works for the people, but he can only push so much. The Corporate fascists who pulled Bush's strings would have no problem offing a president or civil rights leader.

The Grand Old Obstuctionist Party will try to do it the easy way first though. If they can make Obama ineffective like they did Carter, they won't resort to violence.

He couldn't LEAD. That was the issue. He wasn't a true leader. Obama is showing the same signs. His party is in charge just like Carter. But he can't get them to follow his lead.

If the Congress was in Republican control you might be able to say that but they are not.

Agreed! Leadership is what is lacking. I find it amusing how even the liberals on these forums get agitated when a comparison is made between Obama and Carter - thus showing that even they are aware of just how dismal was Carter's performance as President!

Obama has a ways to go before he can be said to be another Carter - but his initial performance as our President certainly warrants the potential comparison.