Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Forget About Bush's Third Term: Worry About Jimmy Carter's Second

I saw an interesting article over the weekend that may be an effective rebuttal to the now-familiar Dem mantra that electing John McCain would be the equivalent of giving George W. Bush a "third term." This article, by blogger Paul Miller (I'm assuming no relation to Rich Miller of Capitol Fax Blog) was picked up by The American Thinker and is receiving some attention for its well thought-out analysis and evidence of eerie similarities between Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter.

During the early Dem debates when we had 8 or so candidates (remember those days?), it seemed that the popular tactic was to see which candidate could bash George Bush the best. Ah-ha, thought I, this is never going to work in the general election, because I know something these candidates apparently don't know- George Bush will not be on the ticket in Nov. 2008.

Well, the joke was somewhat on me, because Obama has found a way to put George Bush on the ticket, and that's to equate John McCain with a third Bush term, although in truth, the policies of George Bush and John McCain are very different... too different, in fact, for a lot of right-wing solid Bush supporters, but I'm assuming they will come around in the face of the alternative...

We may have the last laugh yet, though. While it was undeniably a great tactic to find a pithy, clever way to equate McCain with Bush, Obama may have even more problems if the comparison to Jimmy Carter gets some legs. If you are old enough, harken back to the days of double-digit inflation, hostages in Iran, gas shortages, and little global respect for the American president as a world leader. Carter also had the 'blame America' syndrome that afflicts Obama, and which seems to make Obama want to vet America's behavior in the eyes of the world:

"We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times, whether we're living in the desert or we're living in the tundra, and then just expect every other country is going to say OK, you know, you guys go ahead keep on using 25 percent of the world's energy, even though you only account for 3 percent of the population, and we'll be fine," Obama said.

Oh, so now we're supposed to ask the rest of the planet if we're OK or not?

Is Obama running for president of the world, or of the United States?

Let's see if labeling Obama as the new Carter is an effective response to those who would paint McCain as Bush III. The GOP, too, can play the game of 'brand the other guy with a comparison to an unpopular president.'

Exercise: Ask anyone who was an adult during Carter's term and during Bush's two terms. Then ask them which one they'd rather see repeated, if that's the choice.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

A cold, shivering chill just ran up my spine and it WASN'T from the outside temperatures this morning. TA, I AM old enough to remember those damn Carter days. HELP. I think you've hit on something. Our junior Senator thinks like Carter, talks like him, acts like him. You know the old saying that if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck. You can finish that old adage.

Obama is as naive, as Socialist minded, as out of reality based as Jimmy. I honestly believe that once the campaign begins in earnest, Americans will begin to see through the "teflon" and begin to ask for the meat on the bones to all of his pie in the sky ideas.

And didn't you love hearing Durbin's comment this morning that he, our Senior Senator, couldn't be on the short list for VP. Two from the same state would cancel out the electoral votes. And he thinks that's ALL that would stop that thinking? It's Monday, let's get happy.

Team America said...

Well, actually, it's Tuesday, but we all know what you mean.

Anonymous said...

TA, Speaking of Jimmy Carter, I'm sharing his latest "support for Israel" stunt. Heaven help us with "friends" like Carter. And Carter and friends advise our junior Senator. Need I say more?

Jimmy Carter, in violation of a decades-old U.S. policy, publicly acknowledged that Israel has nuclear weapons.

"The problem is that there are those who can use these statements when it comes to discussing the
international effort to prevent Iran getting nuclear weapons," Zeevi-Farkash told Israel Radio.

Many of us remember the Carter presidency. I'm running to take my Alka Seltzer and my extra strength Excedrin.

Paulie said...

I'm glad you enjoyed the article and no, I'm not related to Rich Miller.

Glad to see you have your own blog. I enjoyed reading your responses to Ellen on her Progressive hate blog. My blood pressure can't take her Socialist ideas anymore and besides she began censoring those who add an intellectual perspective of disagreement toward her hate speech, which as you know is not very hard.

I will put you on my blog roll when I create it shortly. Keep writing.

Publia said...

Barack Obama is a lot peppier than Jimmy Carter, but economically he and Carter might end up being twins.

Anonymous said...

Hard to write a better opening line , and one more nail in the coffin as D.C. dumps on Dan yet again.



politico.com

May 27, 2008
Categories: Campaigns

Campaign gas gimmick backfires

An attention-grabbing stunt by a top Democratic recruit intended to highlight the high price of gasoline instead turned into a public relations embarrassment for the campaign.

Business consultant Dan Seals, the Democrat challenging Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), held an event last week at a suburban Chicago service station where his campaign subsidized the price of gas to the same $1.85 level as it was before Kirk was elected in 2000.

What the campaign didn’t fully anticipate was the nearly two-mile long stretch of traffic created by the stunt, which hamstrung the local police force.

In the end, only 50 drivers were able to fuel at the station – with the rest sitting in traffic unable to receive the discounted gas. And the local police force sent the campaign an additional $2,200 tab to cover the price of traffic control.

Now Kirk’s campaign is accusing Seals of attempting to buy votes, with them claiming the event is a violation of federal law “by reimbursing voters’ gasoline expenses in an effort to influence their votes.”

Several other Democratic candidates have held similar events – though most of them have been candidates in smaller markets looking to generate cheap publicity. Seals is one of the Democrats’ strongest recruits this election cycle, and has over $745,000 funds in his campaign account – enough to air local advertising without having to resort to a grassroots campaign gimmick to garner attention.

Annie said...

TA, I remember the Carter years well - and Barack is more in line with Carter than McCain is in line with Bush. Don't people remember the Republican who gave Bush a hard time - it was McCain and with good reason on fiscal policies.

I agree that as the election gets closer, folks are going to ask more questions of Obama - and that is where he is the weakest.

He is a great preacher, but he has no real substance which is why he stumbles all the time, when asked questions.

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:13pm
The politico article states that other dem campaigns around the country have held similar events. Should've known Seals wasn't bright enough to come up with the gas idea on his own.

Anonymous said...

When will Seals fire Patrick Mogge, his campaign manager? They guy lost this time and now its worse.

The Seals campaign is imploding quickly. You Republicans should not be doing this well...hate to see a good Democrat run a campaign this badly.

Anonymous said...

Wow. That's really ironical that you should mention the Iran hostages.

Because some people (including Reagan staffers) strongly believe that representatives of Ronald Reagan's 1980 presidential campaign (including future CIA director-to-be William Casey) had conspired with Iran to delay the release of the hostages in order to affect the election.

Possibly, Carter had done some house-cleaning in the CIA, and the spooks (including the deposed-director GHW Bush) were a bit pissed off at him. In addition, Reagan promised *future* weapons to Iran, which he later delivered.

You can blame Carter for the hostages, but there was nothing in the failed rescue attempt that can be blamed on him, and several things that can be blamed on a possibly rogue CIA.

Paulie said...

"several things that can be blamed on a possibly rogue CIA."

The key word is "possible," which is actually doubtful. Therefore you can't lay blame on something that is unknown if it happened.

Don't even compare Reagan to Carter that is like comparing a Doctorate to a High School Drop out and the incompetent from Georgia is the drop-out.