Posted on 06/21/2010 3:43:15 AM PDT by lbryce
It took Barack Obama less time to become Jimmy Carter than it took Carter. Sure, their presidencies have taken similar tracks – relative Washington newcomers amidst bad economies and talk of cities defaulting on debt. Even the election of Sen. Scott Brown to take over for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy was similar to the GOP taking the seat held by the late Sen. Hubert Humphrey in 1978.
That was just the opening act. Carter went down in history as man overwhelmed by the office he held. And Tuesday night, in front of the entire nation, Barack Obama sounded just like him.
Not just like Carter on any day. Obama’s first speech to the nation from the Oval Office sounded a lot like Carter’s famous “malaise” speech July 15, 1979, that all but defined the end of his presidency.
Only, Obama sounded out to lunch more than a year earlier than Carter. Both wanted to intervene in the energy crisis. Both wanted to rally a divided America. Neither was up to the task.
See if you can guess which one said the following:
“In little more than two decades we've gone from a position of energy independence to one in which almost half the oil we use comes from foreign countries, at prices that are going through the roof.” Or: “I laid out a set of principles that would move our country towards energy independence.”
Same issue, same bogus fantasy about “energy independence.”
“I'm proposing a bold conservation program to involve every state, county, and city and every average American in our energy battle.” Or: “Tonight I’d like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward.”
Same claim to military analogies, same fight for conservation
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I'm throwing the BS flag here. Carter was challenged by Kennedy...and it was a late challenge...because Carter was also politically weak. That's why incumbents are challenged.
Carter was as much an empty suit as Obama is. They both picked radical cabinet menbers and their policies killed the economy.
Carter ran on two ideas...the toothy grin delivered line, "I will not lie to you," and the foreigh policy position that the Cold War was our fault, not the Russkies, and that we just had to be less "provocative."
There is nothing about Barry that is not Carter-like. This IS Carter's second term.
Carter's administration was one foreign policy disaster after another...and I didn't read about it, I LIVED it. You really are being too kind. The list goes on...Central America, the Shah, the Panama Canal...it's a virtual highlight film of lowlights. That doesn't even begin to touch on the tragedy of domestic policy.
This inside baseball about debate among advisors is wonderful, but we don't elect advisers. We elect Presidents.
Stuff like this wasn't on Carter's radar screen. He believed himself to be the First Administrator. Did you know that he, among other things, demanded to approve the schedule for the tennis courts?
He was not suited by intellect, by training, temperment or judgment to be President. And in that, Barry is his heir.
Carter ran against President Gerald Ford, the only president never popularly elected, ascending to the highest office in the land after Nixon's resignation, having been enlisted by President Nixon to fill the vacancy of the Office of Vice President in the aftermath of Spiro Agnew's resignation.
Had Watergate never occurred, or had the Republican nominee been untainted by Watergate, if, say, Ronald Reagan had in the 1980 campaign defeated Ford, Carter would never have become president.
When you say this is “Carter’s second term” you give Obama far too much credit and you don’t get how much trouble we’re in.
Obama is Hoover’s 2nd term.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.