Replies

There are two levels to analyze the Carter/Obama comparison: either both men were merely misguided leftists who tried but failed to advance the story of their country or one or both of them despised America and wished to neutralize her or even deconstruct the American system.

I am willing to give Jimmy Carter the benefit of inference that he was a patriot who wanted the best for his country even though he regarded American foreign policy to be misguided and domestic policy to be insensitive to the needs of those less "privileged." I believe he accepted a need to counter the Soviet Union but sought to do so through appeasement hoping that that would render the Soviet Union less aggressive and the world safer. He was disabused of his naïveté by the Soviets' invasion of Afghanistan. Domestically, he had no understanding that he was reaping the reward of American intemperance During the Great Society and our squandering of assets in Vietnam. If he believed that inflation and a sagging economy were the results of bad government policy, his reaction was always to add more government policy.

Obama, in contrast, gets no inference of a white heart with an empty head from me. I believe his heart is dark and the man himself is the embodiment of enmities, jealousies, frustrations, and resentments which, in Churchill's words, "corrode the human breast." I believe he actually despises the middle of America, especially white America. "Despises" in the sense that he has no regard for us but sees us as at best greedy, self-destructive capitalists and racists at home and imperialists abroad who are ignorant of the Marxist insights which illuminate his understanding. He identifies not with the masses for whom he professes compassion, but for the elitists who conjure up their remedies to transform a world into one of social justice.

He is invested with the airy indifference typical of Marxist elitists to the human cost of the "good" they do. Therefore, Obama is incapable of being disabused about the wrongheadedness of any of his policies. Any setback is chalked up to the need for the chef to break a few eggs when he makes an omelette. Mao was a positive genius at these rationalizations.

I believe this is a more accurate picture of the mind of Barack Hussein Obama. It is pointless to try to persuade him or even to negotiate with him along the lines of common human give-and-take. Persuading him is like trying to persuade Stalin at Yalta.

He must be utterly beaten, disgraced, and exiled from power.

Well put.

I do remember Jimmah Cahtah and the damage he did. It may not have been deliberate at the time but in the past several decades, Cahtah has revealed himself as a confirmed Jew hater and has accepted huge sums for his Emory University glorification from the Saudis. Something has seriously gone wrong with his brain.
Obama, however, has always been thus.

At the end of the day, down the road, I believe Jimmy Carter will wind up being considered to the superior president to Obama. Carter, to his credit, understood or had some semblance of how to manager, to his discredit, he had wish or desire to delegate, and was a micromanager to an extreme level (in his defense, his underlings were incompetents, but at the same time, he did hire them).

Carter, grasped more in his presidency, then Obama ever will.