-
IRS Union Chief Stonewalls
May 21, 2013 | 51 comments
-
Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?
May 20, 2013 | 53 comments
-
The Liberal Union Behind the IRS
May 16, 2013 | 146 comments
-
Cumulus Media: Suicide of a Company?
May 14, 2013 | 64 comments
-
From Bimbos to Benghazi
May 9, 2013 | 162 comments
The Obama Watch
President Barack Carter
The myth of the incumbent President: a look back at the Reagan/Carter race.
A combination of Ebenezer Scrooge and the mad bomber.
This was Ronald Reagan’s joking description of how President Jimmy Carter’s campaign sought to portray Reagan as the fall campaign of 1980 finally got underway.
And make book on it.
Some version of this old liberal game will be run on Mitt Romney by Barack Obama, starting now. The only difference, perhaps, is that Richie Rich may serve as the substitute for Ebenezer Scrooge.
Don’t believe me?
Let’s begin with a video tour comparing the President Jimmy Carter of 1980 with the President Barack Obama of 2008 and today. It’s as if Obama were just pumping fresh stale air into Carter’s old lines about Ronald Reagan. Take note: the villains — big oil, tax breaks for the rich, heartless Republicans — are always the same. And as Americans have learned the hard way, the results that flow from the Carter and Obama policies have been the same as well.
• Here’s Carter giving his 1980 acceptance speech. He is describing what a Reagan presidency would bring. (Note: included here are both the text and video versions, the latter with time notations when needed.)
Carter, at 14:51 in his speech, says:
I see despair — despair of millions who would struggle for equal opportunity and a better life and struggle alone. And I see surrender — the surrender of our energy future to the merchants of oil, the surrender of our economic future to a bizarre program of massive tax cuts for the rich, service cuts for the poor, and massive inflation for everyone.
• Here’s Obama giving his 2008 acceptance speech. He is describing what a John McCain presidency would bring. Note the same attacks on oil companies and tax breaks.
Obama (at 12: 56 in his speech), says:
Now, I don’t believe that Senator McCain doesn’t care what’s going on in the lives of Americans. I just think he doesn’t know. Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year? How else could he propose hundreds of billions in tax breaks for big corporations and oil companies but not one penny of tax relief to more than one hundred million Americans? How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people’s benefits, or an education plan that would do nothing to help families pay for college, or a plan that would privatize Social Security and gamble your retirement?
• Here’s Carter on energy and oil companies, lashing out at Reagan.
Carter (at 30:49 in his speech):
Then, as now, their policy was dictated by the big oil companies.
About the Author
Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (187) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jeffrey Lord
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/26/president-barack-carter
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Steve| 4.26.12 @ 6:49AM
Ye gods, Mr. Lord! I had stuffed all remembrance of Jimmah safely down the memory hole and now you've....well, now you've ruined my day. Time to reach for a cold Billy from the fridge...
Jack in Wi.| 4.26.12 @ 7:25AM
We had Reagan to beat Carter, not Romney who is just more of the same. For 7 elections the Republicans have put up worthless nominees, each worse then the next. The demographics have changed and the country is much more different, then it was 32 years ago. I hope Obama loses. I just think Romney would be no better and maybe worse, with the neocons he has on his foreign policy team.
Obama is going to run as the peace candidate again. He will claim to have ended the war in Iraq, gotten Bin Laden and to be bringing the troops home from Afganistan. How you going to beat that with an inarticulate chickenhawk like Romney?
On the economy he will blame it all on the Republicans. It worked forFDR and Truman 4 times. How are you going to get away from the fact that both Obama and Romney are the Goldman Sachs, Federal reserve candiates? This election yet again, the people are the losers and the criminals keep control.
Doctor Right| 4.26.12 @ 7:37AM
Squawk! Squawk!
Neocons! Chicken hawks!
Squawk!
Proud 4-F!!
Squawk! Squawk!
Jack want a cracker!!
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 9:47AM
Throw him a fish too. Ark, Ark. He's a draft dodging chicken hisself, so he knows all about chickenhawks , I suppose. Give him a big Bronx cheer too , BBAaaaaaraaackkkk.
Clint| 4.26.12 @ 11:27AM
Uh Oh !
The Deeply Thought Out Rebuttal By The RINO-CINO Intellects.
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 1:52PM
Aark, Aark, Good boy. He's a fish for you too Clint. Jeez, did no feed you??
Occam's Tool| 4.26.12 @ 2:02PM
When one's opponents are self-fertilizing hermaphroditic free living nematodes with 302 neurons (through Eutely) like C(lint) Elegans and the Foul Fromage, much cogitation is not necessary to controvert.
Considering that your standard response to anything you don't like is to bleat out Netanyahu's name (he could kick your ass, he can kick your ass, he may kick your ass in the future), you are hardly one to complain about absence of intellectual rigor in the development of antithesis.
Mickey| 4.26.12 @ 6:43PM
Clinty to the defense of his fellow anti semite Israel hater.
spike59| 4.27.12 @ 5:55AM
one wonders if they are holding hands as they circle the bowl
Jack in Wi.| 4.26.12 @ 6:19PM
The demented Dr. Strangelove strikes again. You must be in a looney bin with your pal Dr. Occam. I would hate to be a patient of either of you lunatics.
JT| 4.27.12 @ 9:25AM
You need to be somebodies patient jew hater, seriously.
BlitheBunny| 4.26.12 @ 11:23AM
Jack,
Most of what you post rubs me the wrong way, but in this instance I am in agreement with you. Romney is not a better candidate. If the Republicans could pull their heads out of their asses they might be able to win this...but I'm not optimistic.
Crassus| 4.26.12 @ 11:27AM
NEOCONS!!! NEOCONS!!!
Clint| 4.26.12 @ 11:29AM
BIBIBOTS !!! BIBIBOTS!!!!!
Mickey| 4.26.12 @ 6:44PM
Clinty is another James Madison.
spike59| 4.27.12 @ 5:56AM
"CINO/RINO ISRAEL FIRSTER SQUAWK BLEAT ACKKKKKK...."
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 11:47AM
Doctor Wrong,
picking on Jack can't hide the fact Romney is to Reagan as chicken shit is to chicken salad.
Why is it you can dump on Arabs and Shiites, but Jack cannot say anything negative about Israel? It has been 10 years 7 months since 9/11-- and counting-- you can't keep demonizing Islam unless you win the war. But we are not winning.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 11:58AM
..."For 7 elections the Republicans have put up worthless nominees, each worse then the next."
Actually, it was six elections: '88, '92, '96, 2000, 2004, 2008 ; however you are correct; I hadn't realized each candidate was worse than the previous one until you wrote it. Perhaps they aren't necessarily getting worse (though maybe they are) yet it is getting more depressing every four years that with all the good conservatives in America, the GOP nominates a turkey every time. Guess it makes us all feel good:
"look, that doofus McCain is no better than me! He's a good ol' boy just like the rest of us guys down at the pool hall."
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 3:25PM
Hey, Alan. In answer to your question about bashing the Muslims. Article today in the Daily Caller, "Islamist majority in Egyptian Parliament passes law allowing husbands to have sexual intercourse with their deceased wives so long as it is within 6 hours after death." That's why we still bash Muslims. Because they are a sick, sick cult. As to your point about our candidates, you are spot on. Romney isn't my first choice, nor second, nor third, nor fourth (well, you get my point) but I would vote for Howdy Doody before I'd vote for this Clarabelle in office now. (Whoops! I think I just dated myself.) The problem we have, as conservatives, and are going to continue to have for a long time, is our base simply isn't as large as the Dems so we, therefore, have to play to the moderate middle, the s0-called "Independents". The Dems don't have to do this because they know they can lie through their teeth to their base and their base will, in their typical lemming-like fashion, smile and pull the lever for them anyway. You see, liberals like to be shit on. They think they deserve it to assuage their guilt for all the naughty things their self-reliant ancestors did to everyone and everything. Our base, on the other hand, is uniformly informed, literate, and unwilling to be shit upon. Ergo, our candidate has to be truthful or the base won't turn out on election day and we end up with the likes of Obamarx. McCain didn't lie to us. We knew exactly who he was and so too many stayed home. This time around, though, we could have nominated George Clooney and the base will turn out. You see, all we need to inspire the base to action we already have. OBAMARX! But, if we had nominated Newt or Santorum, we'd have four more years of Obamarx because we would have lost the independents. Hang in there. Our day will come. Their's another Reagan on the scene, (in fact their's two of them). So, let's all just take care of business this coming November and we'll set the table for a long, long spell of conservative governance in the good ol' USA. (Notice how I didn't say "rule".)
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 4:10PM
"Islamist majority in Egyptian Parliament passes law allowing husbands to have sexual intercourse with their deceased wives so long as it is within 6 hours after death."
But all America cares about besides Israel is the petroleum in the Mideast, and Islamics know it.. whatever they are they are not stupid- they know we don't care about them. We don't care if they have sex with menstruating camels as long as we get petroleum from their region.
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 4:49PM
Geez, Alan. I wish you hadn't suggested that to them. Your are correct, though. We don't care about them and they know it.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 6:11PM
"Geez, Alan. I wish you hadn't suggested that to them."
To them? there's no Arab-language American spectator, is there? if there is, perhaps they are smarter-- or craftier-- than us?
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 6:37PM
One could posit that, given all the aid money Obamarx insists on continuuing to send to them, they can afford first rate translators.
crossworked| 4.26.12 @ 7:48PM
We are the world in energy, the future has begun my libnut.
give a Jew desert........what happened. Thousands of interracial marriages , births and families that know love more than hate. America is and has been the last country for so many. please think
spike59| 4.27.12 @ 5:58AM
We don't care if they have sex with menstruating camels as long as we get petroleum from their region.
=============================
the DNC has a region with petroleum....who knew?
Jack in Wi.| 4.26.12 @ 3:40PM
I am including Romney in the seven Alan. But in his case it would hard to find a worse candidate then Mad bomber McCain. I voted for him only because of Palin and in hopes he would get called to the great bombsite in the sky before the innaugeration. Palin sadly turned out to be, just another Neocon sellout.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 4:04PM
"I am including Romney in the seven Alan."
In Romney's conceited mind he is already the GOP candidate- so in that sense you are right!
spike59| 4.27.12 @ 5:59AM
In Romney's conceited mind he is already the GOP candidate
----------------------------------------
for all practical purposes, he IS...and has been for a while now
vtwin| 4.26.12 @ 12:37PM
You “hope Obama loses" to Romney who "would be no better and maybe worse." I usually respect your comments Jack but today I suspect your prosaic prescription has run out.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 1:22PM
vtwin,
if Romney wins November, he will be treated with the same amount of respect as Obama has been treated. In fact, those of us who detest the post-Reagan GOP will pulverize Romney;
Romney's soul will be mashed into a bloody pulp and he will be thrown onto the garbage heap where he belongs.
crossworked| 4.26.12 @ 7:56PM
I shudder at the responsibility of judgement. You as all liberals are Lord of the Flies.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 2:02PM
So liberals and Ron Paul weirdos are not that far apart on some matters I see, sure you both heartily agree on your hatred of Israel.
Occam's Tool| 4.26.12 @ 2:04PM
Vtwin: in typo veritas. "Prosaic" and "mundane" certainly describe Jack.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 2:27PM
"So liberals and Ron Paul weirdos are not that far apart on some matters I see, sure you both heartily agree on your hatred of Israel"
Oh, so now I can't agree with Clint and or Jack on anything without your permission? And I hate Israel?-- next you'll be IDing me as one of the terrorists who killed the Israeli athletes in '72.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 2:39PM
If you say you usually respect what these Ron Paul fanatics say when so much of it has to do with how terrible Israel is, it speaks for itself. And no one really gives a crap what a liberal troll who compulsively posts here thinks.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.12 @ 4:01PM
"And no one really gives a crap what a liberal troll who compulsively posts here thinks."
You are correct, Todd.
But I care what Jack and Clint write because, as Ron Paul, if nothing else they are sincere whereas most of you as far as can be seen without reading your minds, are radical conservatives who hide your radicalism behind a veneer of gentility.
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 3:28PM
Good on 'ya, Occam.
Jack in Wi.| 4.27.12 @ 1:51AM
Obama deserves to lose in a landslide. Romney in no way deserves to win. The Titanic just keeps sinking, at a faster pace in every election.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 7:25AM
I have very clear memories of the feckless, pointless Carter administration.
On election day 2008, I predicted that Barack Obama would make Jimmy Carter look like Ronald Reagan.
Wish I'd been wrong.
Don't Tread On Me.
Brian Mc| 4.26.12 @ 6:49AM
This article should have its own heading right up until the election just so we can replay it in our heads whenever the leftist media's pessimism has us second guessing our determination. Thanks for a brilliant article, Mr. Lord.
TLP| 4.26.12 @ 9:27AM
I believe that if there are still any REAL Historians around, in the Future, and not just the ones who write their Tomes, based on whatever Media Matters, Moveon, and Zsa Zsa the Media Whore, Faxes them, they will be astonished at the almost total Repeat of History, between these two Democrat Douche Bags.
You've got one from the South, and one from the South Side. Both of them have decided that the oceans of Natural Recources that God has given us, are stupid, and that we should do things Smarter. You know, like Burn our FOOD, in our cars, or Grass, or Pond Scum, instead of OIL. That we should go BACKWARDS in Time, to the Days when Man got his Power, chiefly from the Sun, and the Wind. (As long as they couldn't see it from their Hyannisport Compound) or that we should Ignore the NATURAL Bounty of Enegy Resources, all around us, in favour of Synthetic Fuels and Cow Farts.
Both men HATE JEWS. One hates them as a BIRTHRIGHT, while the other one hates them because that's what Deep South Baptist Pastors, are wont to do.
Afghanistan is a problem. Unemployment is a problem. Interest Rates are a problem. They're not? Oh, I guess your not Old, and living on your Social Security with a ZERO Cola increase, year after year, as the REAL INFLATION NUMBERS continue to Raise the Cost of your Food, and your Gasoline.
Both of these Scumb@gs was gonna be HOPE and CHANGE. One, coming in on the heels of the Watergate affair, and the other after 2 Years of Democrat Control over Both Houses of Congress, and their ZERO OVERSIGHT of their Sacred Cows of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
They have both plunged this Country in to an Economic Black Hole. One of them DECIMATED the Miltary, and the other is on his way. They have both lost Military Aircraft in the Deserts of Iran. They've both displayed an astonishing WEAKNESS, in their dealings with Russia, and they have both created a MALAISE in the people, across the land. And they have BOTH turned their backs on our ALLY Israel, in favour of the Blood Soaked Murder Cult, that seeks to kill us all.
Carter had the Drunk - Billy, and Obama has the half brother, living in a SHACK, on $1 a Month, in Kenya.
Carter had Miss Elizabeth, and Obama has his Illegal Alien Aunt Tootie. (or whatever the hell her name is)
And, of course, both of them have their "Better Halves".
Jimmy had Rosalynn, who always had that look on her face, like she really had to pee, and that she's been holding it in for an hour and a half.
And, of course, The One has "Her Excellency" (as she likes to be called) who resembles the Wookie on Star Wars, with the Bow Legs of your average Old West Cowpoke, and an ass that looks like she's trying to sneak out of Home Depot with 80lbs. Of Scott's Turf Builder with Weed Control, in the back of her pants.
The similarities are astounding.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 9:48AM
YES to the Wookie! YES.
A. Fox| 4.26.12 @ 10:16AM
LOL at the Wookie comment....soooooooo true!
chuck| 4.26.12 @ 1:38PM
And the ass comment is priceless!
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 3:45PM
Her Excellency, Moochelle my Butt, is the equal of Her Thighness, the Arkansas Broadbeam, aka Hildebeast in the caboose Dept. Birds of a feather...
A Grin without a Cat| 4.26.12 @ 10:20AM
"...Carter had Miss Elizabeth...""
I think you mean Miz Lillian.
Ground Control| 4.26.12 @ 11:00AM
I think he also had "Miss Amy" his chief adviser on nuclear proliferation.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 11:09AM
Hey, that reminds me, in Chicago on the freeway from O'Hare they had a big road sign declaring Chicago a "Nuclear Free Zone" for maybe 20 years - it worked...
Well it did...didn't it?
NOT!
albert constantine jr.| 4.26.12 @ 12:27PM
They seem to be doing quite well killing each other with conventional weapons, so who needs WMDs?
albert constantine jr.| 4.26.12 @ 12:29PM
"trying to sneak out of Home Depot with 80lbs. Of Scott's Turf Builder with Weed Control"
TLP;
Is this a product placement sponsorship that benefits your landscaping business?
TLP| 4.26.12 @ 4:09PM
Maybe.
TLP| 4.26.12 @ 4:09PM
Maybe.
Occam's Tool| 4.26.12 @ 2:06PM
That's what Deep South Liberal Pastors are wont to do. John Hagee is Southern, and does not hate Jews. I like Pastor Hagee, by the way.
Occam's Tool| 4.26.12 @ 2:07PM
Other than that minor correction, spot on as usual, TLP.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 2:08PM
Now that is a great comment with apt comparisons. I saw Obama as being Carter redux when he got elected and it has come to pass in many ways. Obama is even worse due to his desire to stir up racial conflict and has no respect for this country while Carter was mostly a clueless liberal who has become a very bitter old man. Let us hope the same happens to Obama being a bitter one-termer.
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 3:32PM
TLP, you are priceless!
Appleby| 4.26.12 @ 6:51AM
And both of them had a face and a voice that infuriated people every time they turned on the television and that face and voice was there...
Von Mises Jr| 4.26.12 @ 8:30AM
Jimma Carter was simply a mean and incompetent fool. Obama is more like Orwell's "Big Brother." The mere sight of his face or jive populist horse manure that comes from his hate spewing mouth leave me feeling like Winston Smith.
MikeG| 4.26.12 @ 6:58PM
Well said, Mr. Mises. Obama is destroying our country, and fools here whine about Romney's religion, or that he is not the perfect candidate.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:26PM
We all know what it is about Obama's face that infuriates the right.
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.26.12 @ 7:00AM
Romney proved he could and would play hardball during the nominating process.
I* just hope he has the balls to do so in the general.
Harry the Horrible| 4.26.12 @ 9:12AM
I hope he's willing to endure the charge of "racist" and go seriously negative on Obama.
After all, there is so much to go negative with!
And blacks aren't going to vote for him anyway.
vtwin| 4.26.12 @ 9:34AM
…or woman, young people, Hispanics.
Harry the Horrible| 4.26.12 @ 10:10AM
Married women are mostly Republican; Flukes, of course, are mostly Democrat. Youngsters have lost enthusiasm. If they identify as "American" the "Hispanics" will likely vote against Obama. If they identify as Hispanics or another nationality rather than American, they probably shouldn't be voting... Roll on Voter ID!
vtwin| 4.26.12 @ 12:23PM
Hispanics might find it easier to "identify as American" if weren’t subjected to “papers please” laws because of the color of their skin.
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 1:53PM
Smoking your hair again, I see.
Occam's Tool| 4.26.12 @ 2:09PM
vtwin:
NO ONE, I mean NO ONE, has ever asked me for papers on my kids when I have been travelling with them. I look Lebanese, and my son looks Mestizo, emphasis on Hispanic, and my daughter is definitely Native (and she is Hispanic). No One asks.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 2:19PM
So why do I have to show my "papers" when I use a credit card, write a check, go through airport security, rent a car, check in to a hotel, buy a gun, get pulled over by a cop, go to the doctor, do almost anything with the government? All of my ancestors were from Europe, not even the Iberian Peninsula. So when do the "brown-skinned" people have to show their papers that I don't?
Hmmmm.
They don't - its a lie.
Don't Tread On Me.
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 3:34PM
I met a bartender a few years back in a NYC watering hole whose name was definitely Italian. That's because both his parents were born and raised in Italy. He was a recent new legal resident alien. So what you say?? Well, the thing was, he was born in Argentina where there are many ethnic enclaves of European origin. When he came to the US my acquaintence was promptly classified as Hispanic by the gummint bureaucrats even though he spoke Italian and English but not Spanish or any derived Spanish dialect found in S. America. He found that quite amusing.
Ground Control| 4.26.12 @ 11:01AM
Check the polls. Bozo the Clown in the White House is losing the young people vote, slowly but surely.
vtwin| 4.26.12 @ 12:24PM
Sure, good luck with that one.
chuck| 4.26.12 @ 1:42PM
The college students who voted for Onumbnuts the last time around are the same ones who now can't find a decent job because Obozo's policies have killed job creation.
spike59| 4.27.12 @ 6:02AM
romney need not win an outright majority of the 'youth vote' to win; he simply needs to do better than Snooki McCain's daddy
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:27PM
Sure, if you look at Rasmussen polls. To adjust a Rasmussen poll for reality, you take 5 points away from the Republican and give them to the Democrat.
Bobloblaw| 4.26.12 @ 7:07AM
In 1980 the electorate was 88% white. In 2012 the electorate will be barely 70% white. Reagan could get 50% of the total vote with 56% of the white vote and not a single vote from anyone else. In 2012 getting 56% of the white vote and not a single vote from anyone else gets you 40% of the total vote.
Even before we take into account the Marxist millennial generation, the electorate is far far more friendly towards democrats than in 1980.
By election day 2016, we'll know what America's future holds. If Obama wins in 2012 and the left wins again in 2016, Carville's permanent Democrat Majority will have arrived. Future elections will require the GOP win upwards of 65% of the white vote. A near impossibility. Only Nixon in 72 and Reagan in 84 came close to that number.
Bobloblaw| 4.26.12 @ 7:12AM
For me the interesting question will not be does the GOP and conservatism survive: it doesn't. The interesting question is what happens to the Dem party? Does it remain intact or breakup with no GOP opposition? And what happens to the USA? Does it become a one party socialist corrupt authoritian state? Kind of like Mexico under the PRI or perhaps present day CA
Ret. Marine| 4.26.12 @ 7:29AM
in response as to what happened to the dem party, nothing really, if you understand this party's affiliations, it's beginnings, and the end result of 80 + years of indoctrination of the supposed smartest people on the planet, not that they ever needed to be reminded as to just how stupid they really are. As anyone who has been upon this earth of ages (above the 45-50 yr mark) knows, this party is a continuation of what it always has been, it's just they are now, with their lead liar in place, more brazen in their attempts to push more of the same in the open, vrs. what they knew was a no-go-zone of the past in regards to being a Patriot, or citizen of these United States, against theier wishes to be a part of the global one world society, they think alike, act alike, and refuse to accept the others, as in Conservative voices, as legitimate or even in need of a voice. There is no differences between this 80+ years other than the fact they seem to think they have the numbers, dumbed down voices, in the open, directly threatening the better judgements of the voices of concern, on their side. one word for these types, BRAZEN and that's all that has happened. It's obvious to me , they have failed at one word they do not even mention, fear. If they have nothing to fear of their power, why then all the hatred in opposition or their penchant to "fundamentally transform us to what?, they didn't even have the gut to name it.
Von Mises Jr| 4.26.12 @ 8:34AM
As a economics geek, I always knew what "change" and "fundamental transformation" meant. Let me say it for anyone who has not figured it out yet: SOCIALISM.
Obama's economy, his dictatorial tyranny and lies are what socialism looks like. How ya likin it?
A. Fox| 4.26.12 @ 10:44AM
Look real close at carter's policies....SOCIALISM!
vtwin| 4.26.12 @ 12:17PM
To paraphrase Bill Maher, when in the fall of 2008 the financial system was on the verge of collapse in this country was Bush a socialist for offering to bailout Wall Street or was Wall Street socialists for accepting it.
Von Mises Jr| 4.26.12 @ 1:00PM
Yes
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 3:35PM
ditto
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 3:40PM
Von, from an economics perspective, you are correct about this administration but only partially so. It is possible to have democratic socialsim, (although that sucks, too) but these folks want a lot more than that. If Obamarx is re-elected we are going to see a hard, hard push towards the totalitarian socialism practiced in such worker's paradises as Cuba, North Korea, China and the late (but not lamented by many expect the Putinites) Soviet Union. When Axelrod said they were "Ready to rule." he was being completely candid and transparent. Scary as hell, quite frankly.
Von Mises Jr| 4.26.12 @ 4:05PM
I could not agree more. The democratic socialism might just be characterized as tyranny of the majority. but their aim is tyranny of the minority.
For those in Rio Linda or OWS, that means you are toast after you help them steal from the rich. They are not nice people and they are not your BFF.
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 4:12PM
In point of fact, those in Rio Linda or OWS will be the first one's lined up. They always get rid of the ones who are swayed easiest first, lest they listen to someone else's Siren song.
Von Mises Jr| 4.26.12 @ 10:02PM
Also, they are the ones that know how it was done. They must be gotten rid of lest they talk too much.
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 10:57PM
Think Trotsky.
Ret. Marine| 4.27.12 @ 8:54AM
Yeah I got that part to as well, it's just the others that I have been concerned with, even members of my own family, it might not be nice but, almost every time any of them phone me with their pleas of help and support, I ask them, hows that hope and change working out for you, more like dopes and deranged, they won't talk to me after that, good, I am in no need of their idiot asses anyway.
Renaissance Nerd | 4.27.12 @ 10:02AM
I have a minor caveat; socialism comes in many flavors and the flavor favored by the present left is fascism. They're pretty weak-kneed about it, but they are more interested in making corporations crawl and grovel than stealing ownership, hence fascists rather than garden-variety socialists.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:28PM
Where would this "dictatorial tyranny" be? Oh, that's right, the very existence of a Democrat in the White House is "dictatorial tyranny" in your loony mind.
Jack in Wi.| 4.26.12 @ 7:29AM
Boboblaw: Very intresting comment. We are very close to the kleptocracy of the PRI. The kleptocracy has continued, in Mexico, even with the victory of the PAN in the last 2 elections.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 8:16AM
We survived the Barry Goldwater's blow out in '64. We'll survive victory in 2012. Even with the moderate Romney as the victor.
You seem to think socialism outlasts and overpowers private property and individual freedoms. In the last 100 years that has NOT been the trend. The fundamentals of the two systems have not changed-they are far better understood by far more people than they were just forty years ago.
So, if you are being pessimistic in your prediction, you should have more hope.
If you are being hopeful in your pessimistic prediction, I say fie on you and your house.
Freedom is a very, very hot fire!
Don't Tread On Me!
Bobloblaw| 4.26.12 @ 8:32AM
""We survived the Barry Goldwater's blow out in '64.""
Did we??? We got socialized medicine, lost a war in vietnam and got 60s radicals. Plus the Dem party in 64-65 wasnt radical anti-American Exceptionalism like they are today.
Conservatives say we got Reagan cuz we had Carter. But Carter did more damage than Reagan did good.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 9:54AM
Okay, then you should just give up and quit. But be quiet, stop fomenting despair! There are future generations who will be seriously harmed by surrender at this time.
Further more, I disagree with your premise that Carter did more damage than Reagan repaired. You are mistaken in that! Things got way better under Reagan! No more USSR, communisim on its heels and in decline! De-regulation of huge portions of the economy. Jimmy Carter did no damage that compared to benefits of Reaganism.
Besides the only way they win is if we quit! No quitting, ever.
Buck up, laddie - we ain't dead yet!
Boar Hunter| 4.26.12 @ 12:28PM
It's not his fault. He a victim of the media (Television and print) and cannot see beyond what they are projecting onto the screen or pages of the propaganda they produce. I'm not blaming him. If you do not have any access to real world examples of good people and a moral youth you have to rely on what the media describes as social norms. I often have to remind myself not to despair.
The modern day media is the most evil and divisive influence that America has ever confronted. They don't report the news, they decide what it is and manufacture it or ignore it as suits their needs. They engage in an unending barrage of propaganda with impunity. They manufacture the reality of acceptance for the degenerate vermin who comprise the left.
They destroy their enemies. Look at what they did to Palin. As governor of Alaska, Palin's job approval rating with the people she governed was as high as 93%. Look what the media did to her. All you have to do is mention her name and the left goes into an apoplectic fit recounting lie after lie as gospel truth because they heard it on Saturday Night Live.
You know everything about Palin from the time she was in the womb, albeit mostly lies. Remember their twittering glee at the release of her e-mail? They always judge others by their own lack of moral character and they just knew they would find some kind of dirt. So sad, nothing there either. After reading the e-mail, some actually admitted how they had been wrong in their opinion of her, but we all know that was just crazy talk and it went away real fast.
Exposed to such a deluge of information, liberals, being the willfully ignorant rubes they are, will always accept any lie they are told, as they care not for the truth. They know that to state the truth would deviate from the liberal narrative and they would be excoriated by their peers. Truth to power my hairy white behind. Liars and cowards one and all.
Let me ask, what do we know about Obama's past? Even what we learn is labeled off limits or ignored. Obama's birth certificate was examined by law enforcement experts and determined to be a fraud. Scoff all you want about the conclusion of these career professionals who put their reputation on the line by becoming "Birthers," if it was Bush. By the way they manufactured documents about Bush also didn't they. It's not exactly like they don't have a history of forgery.
Look at what these jackals did to Zimmerman. Funny no one notices that every main stream outlet puts out the same cookie cutter nightly news report and no one seems to mind. They even told the same lies about Zimmerman. How funny. If I didn't know better I would think they were colluding against him. We only found out what a piece of crap Saint Trayvon was through the british media. It's enough to make you weep.
But it does go beyond the news does it not? Look at how men are portrayed in commercials. Thanks goodness we have our wives to save us from the evil messes we make of everything. Thank goodness we have strong women, who even weighing less than a hundred pounds, can best a dozen men in hand to hand combat. Oh, and the ever happy, and emotionally secure homosexual character that we see on every last prime time television show produced. We have sure come a long way from Little House on the Prairie.
Where will it end? What must be done to hold them to account? People are now speculating about the coming race riots. I speculate that if the media was not such a vile cesspool and its minions not a brood of soulless whores we would never be asking the question.
I cannot help but think that if the liberals were cut off from their umbilical cord of deceit the world would be a better place. But, like the poor, idiots will always be among us.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 1:18PM
Boar Hunter,
You points are all true, your logic sound.
But we have to recognize the successes we have enjoyed-as rare as they seem to be. Elsewise we will fall prey to despair and quit trying. That's the only way they win.
We have to fight despair and defeatism within our own ranks. Every army must to be successful...
Keep up your good work and good hunting!
Don't Tread On Me.
Boar Hunter| 4.26.12 @ 2:41PM
LOL, I was not suggesting despair my friend, just stated that it's sometimes hard not to.
What I was suggesting is that our media needs to be rained in or punished in some manner when they willfully ignore the law.
We will never change their politics.
I hate the media.
goldwater girl| 4.26.12 @ 2:27PM
Great comments. I find it curious how all the media darlings that were so quick to label Zimmerman as a racist, are completely ignoring the now-emerging stories and evidence that support his story. Move along, nothing to see here.
Boar Hunter| 4.26.12 @ 2:42PM
Every time. Without fail. I hope Zimmerman finds an attorney that will sue this Jackals into bankruptcy.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:32PM
There isn't evidence emerging to support Zimmerman's story. His story remains implausible at best.
Bobloblaw| 4.27.12 @ 7:51AM
Im not a victim of the media. Im am looking at demographics, and they look bad for conservatism.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:31PM
"Obama's birth certificate was examined by law enforcement experts and determined to be a fraud. Scoff all you want about the conclusion of these career professionals"
Except that they're not "career professionals" or "law enforcement experts" at all. They're a volunteer "posse" with no training requirements or membership standards whatsoever. And they did no investigation whatsoever. They did not actually examine Obama's birth certificate. They just regurgitated already-debunked lies.
A. Fox| 4.26.12 @ 10:20AM
You need to note people MOST likely to vote not those on the voting roles.
vtwin| 4.26.12 @ 12:07PM
The Legacy Reagan; the grandchildren and great grandchildren of the nearly 3 million illegal immigrants Reagan granted amnesty to, if the statistic hold 50% will not even achieve a 9th grade education, will haunt the future Republican Party. Oh, that just breaks my heart.
Boar Hunter| 4.26.12 @ 12:46PM
Yes I agree with you completely.
The fact Reagan was convinced to compromise with the lying Democrats was one of his biggest mistakes.
The fact that it gave gutter snipes like you the ability to once again misstate history and in your willful ignorance lie about the historical record does sadden me.
Fortunately there is the truth of the matter and I had thought even the most ignorant liberals had learned that story had no traction. I assume you think that it happened so long ago that you can just lie and people will believe you. After all, the pond scum sucking liberal vermin you associate with believe it. It must be true...right?
Occam's Tool| 4.26.12 @ 2:12PM
Their lack of education is due to the Welfare State structure that fractures homes; not due to lack of educational opportunity or funds for that.
I know of two Hispanics who are going to do just fine when they get to college. Funny thing, they are both born overseas. The difference is, they were made citizens completely legally and above board. They are also, of course, the World's Two Cutest Children. And they belong to a very proud daddy.
Hawaii Jeff| 4.28.12 @ 3:09PM
You didn't factor in all the dead people who vote early & often!
mjs_pa| 4.26.12 @ 7:57AM
It is fitting you write this piece one day after Carter "endorses" romney.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 9:54AM
Because the worse Obama looks, the better Carter looks comparatively speaking...
Rosalynn made him do it, anyway.
kwan| 4.26.12 @ 8:14AM
I just think everyone should have a fair (there's that word fair again) chance Obama tells us . The left seems to be trying to make the argument that every citizen is somehow being stifled by our free enterprise/capitalist system. But once Obama "fundamentally transforms" the nation into a Totalitarian Socialist State all stifling of the citizens will come to an end. This argument is laughable and fraudulent.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 8:19AM
It is NOT about what you think!
It IS about the Constitutional foundation of our country. Refer back to that and you can see 1. how far we are off the path, 2. how we can get back to it, 3. how much the socialists hate the Constitution, and why...
DTOM
LIBERALPARASITES| 4.26.12 @ 8:44AM
The worst President in the history of the United States, even worse than -obama-...
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 4:15PM
Not possible to be worse than Obamarx. Simply NOT possible.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:32PM
The worst presidents in US history were Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
Mike G| 4.26.12 @ 8:56AM
Obama is using Carter's playbook because he wishes he could be as good a president as Carter was. And Carter is ecstatic that he is no longer the worst in history.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:33PM
Carter never was anywhere close to being the worst. The presidents immediately before and after him, though, rank near the bottom.
Gloria| 4.26.12 @ 8:57AM
What can I say, in politics as in life everything that is new is just history with modern clothes if you understand me, just a little rebrush and you have a new speech, a new president, a new life totally built on those before you!
Storage London
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.26.12 @ 9:17AM
I remember the economic terror when Carter was President. Obama's reign of terror is worse.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 9:55AM
WAY!
Dustoff| 4.26.12 @ 9:50AM
Now if Gun walker wasn't bad enough. we have learned we also gave the Mex gangs (greanades) too.
Someone needs to go away for a long time.
Yes all this under O-dumber's control!
Boar Hunter| 4.26.12 @ 12:47PM
Quit misstating the facts. Control? It was done under his direction.
Mike Hawk| 4.26.12 @ 9:50AM
The Jimmuh did do one noteworthy thing. He convinced a lot of us that we should never vote for a Democrat again. I have held true to that.
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 1:20PM
You've done it! You've found the lone, solitary, single success of the Obama administration!
WooHoo!
Don't Tread On Me...
Pete| 4.26.12 @ 10:03AM
Sadly, I fear we may have been bred out of the ability to win elections. Between outright fraud, buying of votes and no ID requirements, plus lower courts packed with libtard judges, any state within 3 pts will be stolen.
Mark| 4.26.12 @ 10:11AM
I've always called Obama "Jimmy Carter 2.0". I'm old enough to have lived and sufferd through Carter's miserable policies & economy, and this article's pairing of the two's statements is just stunning. Romney needs to wrap Obama's similarities to Carter right around his neck, like Reagan wrapped the "misery index" around Carters!
A. Fox| 4.26.12 @ 10:30AM
Mark so was I. I was 30 when carter "came to power". Long lines for gas, price controls, etc.
Finding good work was hard for VN vets at the
time. No lib in power would hire us. Almost like now.
goldwater girl| 4.26.12 @ 2:31PM
bought my first house in 1978, how about those interest rates? And it seemed there was no cure for inflation. At least, that's what we were told. Kind of like now, with 8% unemployment being the "new" normal.
Appleby| 4.26.12 @ 6:30PM
Remember the sweater and "malaise"? I remember coming home from work and settling in before the teevee for a long night of election returns, only to discover that by 8:30 p.m. Sherman had already marched through Georgia and Jimmy was headed for Appomattox Courthouse.
The only election that has been more fun than that one was the next one.
Still not voting for Romney. I plan to vote John Galt.
MikeG| 4.26.12 @ 6:50PM
Who gives a shit? Why do you repeat yourself every day? Pompous blowhard.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:34PM
And clearly you're stupid enough to believe that things were better under the disaster that was the Reagan presidency.
Crawler| 4.26.12 @ 10:19AM
I've been drawing similarities to Obama's re-election and the 1980 presidential election for the last year or so.
I could not agree more with Mr. Lord.
But if there's one thing he didn't mention, it's that the average American - you know, the American Idol, Dancing with the Stars types, et al - doesn't pay attention to politics much. But they DO pay start paying attention when incompetence in D.C. abounds, runs amok and starts hitting them in their wallets and livelihoods.
I sincerely believe that this presidential election year will mirror 1980. And when the sun rises on Wednesday, November 7th this year, a lot of Progressive Democrats will know that the majority of voting Americans were fed up with their arrogance and incompetence and cast them into the abyss of insignificance; where they'll remain for many years to come.
Obama and his overreaching political party will get their comeuppance in exactly 194 days...
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:36PM
The "overreaching political party" has been the Republican Party. Ever since you guys took the House in 2010 and took over most state governments, you've pursued unpopular extremist social legislation instead of doing what you promised and working to create jobs. There's been a huge backlash against this extremism, and you'll be punished in November. Not only will Obama be reelected, Democrats will regain control of the House.
Attila The Hun| 4.26.12 @ 10:50AM
How Ironic, the comparison seems like I'm in a time capsule going back 34 years where I had to buy gas only in odd days, and wait hours to fill my tank. It is sad see people who never learned from history, repeating the same mistake over and over. As Einstein said insanity is repeating the same experiment again and again and expecting differed result. Hopefully this time around American people wouldn't give Carter a third term.
Appleby| 4.26.12 @ 6:33PM
I was in California then and Jerry Brown was governor and had printed up zillions of gas rationing books in anticipation -- and then the fake gas crisis ended and everybody went back to normal. My Pontiac got 10 mpg and cost $7.26 to fill up the tank and I thought the first was great and the second was unconscionable. Those were the days.
Dan| 4.26.12 @ 11:19AM
I'm beginning to think that obama has a ceiling in the polling, and he's not going to break through it. And that despite the best efforts of the media to gin up the obama mania that we saw four years ago.
Whereas Romney has a floor, and nothing he can do will cause him to crash through it, because that bedrock of support is determined to evict obama.
KennesawJack| 4.26.12 @ 4:17PM
From your keyboard to God's eyes.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:37PM
That's pure wishful thinking, Dan.
Dan| 4.26.12 @ 11:21AM
If you look at our present "Misery Index," obama's numbers compete with those Carter himself.
I'm kind of surprised the Republicans haven't used that number against obama.
What are they waiting for.......
DTOM!| 4.26.12 @ 1:21PM
Obama'd win that battle if DOC wasn't mis-reporting inflation, un-employment statistics... Hands down!
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 2:50PM
Real unemployment and inflation not the doctored numbers they give us is right close to 20% which is close to the Carter misery index.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:40PM
19.72 was the highest "misery index" figure under Carter. Under Obama, the highest has been 11.23. I know conservatives tend to be bad at math, but 11.23 is a lot lower than 19.72.
Chuck| 4.26.12 @ 12:01PM
Reagan's message was loud and clear and he did what he said he was going to do plus the youth of the day were enthusiastic for Reagan. Romney on the other hand is the default establishment candidate stands for nothing, purposely so to deceive conservatives, is not a conservative and would govern as a liberal. Come on now lest we forget Romneycare, liberal social issues and the like. Reagan stood for something and ran a brilliant mostly positive campaign using judiciously negative punches at the right moment. Romney stands for nothing and his true liberal self will manifest itself during the campaign...I agree with Obama over lower interest rates for student loans...just the first drop.
Renaissance Nerd | 4.27.12 @ 10:41AM
That might be true if normal circumstance obtained, but they don't. No petite-fascist ever dared go so far into the red as Obama. These deficits are unprecedented, and we would be WAY better off if we went back to ordinary liberal policies rather than this hard-left fascist takeover crap. Even if Romney were a liberal, which I do not concede, he would be FAR better than the fascist-in-chief who currently resides in a place We the People put him. I may be a comforting vanity to believe it's all the fault of the media, or McCain, or the 'RINO establishment,' but the fact is We the People haven't been fulfilling our duties. The TEA Party is just getting started, and they're doing it right, starting at the bottom rung in many places around the nation. The Top-down approach is why the Libertarian Party is still a footnote after all this time. You don't start with governors and presidents; you start with dog-catchers and Podunk town councils. If Romney ends up being a wishy-washy George Bush 'compassionate' conservative, we'll still be better off, because it keeps our nation intact while the TEA Party germinates. We'll get at least that, because despite Romneycare, which btw was originally fashioned by Heritage, Romney IS fairly fiscally conservative, and personally at least a social conservative. This is better than the other option, because there are a lot of excellent recruits waiting in the wings. If stalling for time is our best option, then that's what we do. Sitting home or voting for a hopeless cause only benefits the fascists; ask any Perot voter.
Bill| 4.26.12 @ 12:24PM
Barack=Bullshit
Hussen=Hypocrate
Obama=Overrated
What is "BHO"
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 4:32PM
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill the Bigot, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bigot Bill.
GO AWAY!
Paul McGrath| 4.26.12 @ 12:45PM
As I've said before: Romney may not be Reagan, but he will be 100 times better than the execrable Bush.
And he will crush Obama. You heard it here first: Romney 53, Obama 46.
chuck| 4.26.12 @ 1:47PM
Romney wins 40-45 states.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:41PM
That's just hilariously delusional, chuck.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 2:54PM
That is a bit harsh on Bush, he had his real down points but he had some positives. Romney will be better because the circumstances will demand it, no more time to play footsie with the left and Romney understands the dire economic circumstances we face. No more entitlements and failed stimulus that Bush did and Obama is greatly expanding. Greece and Spain will be our future if Romney loses or fails to stop the madness.
skip| 4.26.12 @ 4:01PM
Paul,
Bush prevented a President Al Gore.
Bush prevented a President John Kerry.
Bush appointee John Roberts is Supreme Court Chief Justice.
Bush appointee Sam Alito is a Supreme Court Justice.
Bush enhanced interrogation provided the information to locate bin Laden.
Bush tax cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003 coincided with federal revenue increasing 44% from $1.782314 trillion in 2003 to $2.567985 trillion in 2007.
If Romney preforms 100 times better than just these Bush accomplishments 'Reagan who?' may be a good reelection slogan in '16.
Leave the emotional prattle to the liberals. Conservatives are best served sticking to reason and experience.
skip| 4.26.12 @ 4:05PM
Good grief.
Conservatives are best served if skip can properly spell simple words such as 'performs'.
Sheesh.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 4:50PM
Happens to everyone. There is too much hyperbole about how bad Bush was and those here who say they will not vote for Romney because he is a RINO. Fine in the primary but a very foolish attitude to take in the general election. It is true Romney has not been a real conservative much of his life being Mr. Pragmatic business man and getting elected in Massachusetts but he is showing signs he is starting to get it with his speech and will run a much better more aggressive campaign than McCain. Not too mention he can actually articulate economic issues that McCain would just foolishly babble without comprehension.
The key is continuing the gains of 2010 in Congress by defeating the liberals and replacing useless Republicans (John Boehner must be replaced) and we could then reverse some of the damage of Obamaism and restore some sanity to DC.
Appleby| 4.26.12 @ 6:34PM
I don't think Romney is a RINO. I think he is a Mormon.
Not voting for a man who thinks he will be promoted to God when he dies.l
MikeG| 4.26.12 @ 6:51PM
Religious bigot.
crossworked| 4.26.12 @ 8:13PM
lame, morethan lame
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:43PM
"Bush prevented a President Al Gore.
Bush prevented a President John Kerry.
Bush appointee John Roberts is Supreme Court Chief Justice.
Bush appointee Sam Alito is a Supreme Court Justice."
None of those are good things.
"Bush enhanced interrogation provided the information to locate bin Laden."
No, it did not provide any of the information leading to Bin Laden. Even Rumsfeld and Cheney admit that.
"Bush tax cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003 coincided with federal revenue increasing 44% from $1.782314 trillion in 2003 to $2.567985 trillion in 2007."
And if not for the tax cuts, revenue would've increased even more.
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 4:33PM
Sorry, but O'Romney will be McLame 2.o.
MikeG| 4.26.12 @ 6:53PM
Nick,
You make a lot of sense on religion but not much on politics. Doesn't it bother you that you agree with Clint, Jack in Wi, and the other assorted nuts rooting for Obama?
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 7:06PM
MikeG,
Thanks for the, um, compliment? I think.
I don't think that those whom you've listed and I would agree about why we think O'Romney is going to lose.
I just don't see how he is going to get to 270+ electoral votes. Or, I should say, that I only see three ways that he could win:
1) The DOW plummets to 7,000 and gas is over $5.00 a gallon.
2) There are riots this summer.
3) O'Bama has a huge scandal. (Not very likely, this late in the game.)
A fourth possibility is that O'Romney gets a conservative transplant, fires his RINO consultants, and attacks O'Bama as hard as he did Mssrs. Santorum and Gingrich.
Do you believe he will do that?
MikeG| 4.26.12 @ 7:30PM
It was a compliment. You are too intelligent to agree with the Clint/Jack loons on anything.
Romney will attack Obama because he wants to win. Obama is a rich target. We don't need any of the scenarios you suggest. The economy is terrible, gas prices are high, and four more years of Obama means the end of our country as we know it. Any Republican is better than Obama. Whining (not you) about Romney is for fools. Defeating Obama should be the focus.
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 7:38PM
MikeG,
Thanks for kind words.
I could be wrong, but, I don't think that I am.
If I have to hold my nose to vote for O'Romney (which I will,) then there are going to be a whole bunch of conservatives who will stay home, or, vote third party.
I don't see how he can make-up those losses with independents.
We'll see, though.
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 7:39PM
Oops! That should be: Thanks for THE kind words.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 7:46PM
Anyone who votes for a 3rd party is not conservative, they are idiots.
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 8:25PM
Not true, Todd S.
Many conservatives vote on principle, including myself.
While I don't believe O'Romney is Pro-Life, at all, I will still hold my nose to vote for him. But, I could understand why someone wouldn't.
Other conservatives have different principles, which they will not violate. You can disagree with their stance, but, it doesn't make them "stupid."
And, if the GOP ever nominates a pro-abort for the presidency, I will vote third party. Bank on it.
Todd S| 4.26.12 @ 9:23PM
I am referring to this election specifically. What 3rd party candidate is worth a damn especially when Obama is president? I will state it like this then, anyone who votes for a 3rd party in 2012 is not a conservative but an idiot.
W| 4.26.12 @ 11:06PM
I cannot think of one conservative principle that would be advanced by voting for Obama, or voting third party/staying home that would help elect Obama. We have never had a perfect conservative candidate, but some were close like Reagan. On every issue important to conservatives and Republicans, there is no question that Romney will be better than Obama. The choice is Obama v. Romney, and not Obama v. the Perfect Conservative.
Nick| 4.27.12 @ 12:03AM
W,
It's not about having the "perfect conservative candidate." See my response to Todd.
It's about not violating one's principles, pure and simple. Where that line in the sand happens to fall, will be different for each individual.
If someone doesn't see that much difference between O'Bama and O'Romney, they don't see how voting for Mitt will advance conservative principles, either.
W| 4.27.12 @ 6:43AM
Nick
Cutting taxes, reducing the deficit, allow drilling for oil, supporting our allies such as Israel, and repealing Obamacare are some differences between Romney (and any Republican) and Obama. What principles are advanced by electing Obama?
Nick| 4.26.12 @ 11:54PM
Todd S,
Everyone has a different line in the sand, don't they? Where is your's?
I'll put it this way: Will you vote for anyone that has an "R" behind their name? No matter what they stand for?
Would you have voted for Snarlin' Arlen S-P-E-C-T-E-R? How about Dede Scozzafava? Olympia Snowe?
Would you vote for Shrillary the Hut Clinton if she changed parties? What if O'Bama changed to an "R"?
If your answer is "no" to any of those questions, then you have a line that you will not cross. And, if that is the case, then isn't it hypocritical to say it's okay for you to have inviolate principles, but, not okay for others?
Instead of calling conservative allies "idiots," try to understand their point of view. You might not agree with them, but, that won't change the fact that they're not going to vote for O'Romney. No matter what.
skip| 4.27.12 @ 12:41AM
Greetings Nick,
None of the idiots you listed have bested all other candidates to be the nominee, nor are they ever likely to. It's Romney, not those hypotheticals, and he actually -not hypothetically- bested -out performed- Pawlenty, Huntsman, Johnson, Bachmann, Paul, Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum.
There is no point wasting words or time on those who will not vote for Romney. There is a point arguing why Romney is the best available choice to use one's vote on, and seek to convince as many as possible between now and November with the old intelligence and honesty based on reason and experience bit.
Reagan was once an abortion bill passing democrat. People learn and change. Romney has obviously learned something since '08 when he could not best McCain. And so has the country. I don't see Romney losing. I think he wins comfortably.
For us, it all comes down to how much Romney will heed the tea party conservatives, won't it? And, even if your prediction of Romney is correct, if we have stalwart tea partiers running the show in the house and the senate they will keep him in line, no? Either way, whether Romney has seen the light, or you are correct, it is going to be either Romney or Obama, and Romney is preferrable either way, yes?
You, as much as any poster, know the power of hope, faith, and prayer. Now is the time, my brother. It is disheartening to see you, a most positive guy, focusing so much on the negative. And believe me when I say I understand why. Obama is a gift from God. The dumb shit is such an idiot he is showing everyone how pathetic and despicable liberalism really is. His performance campaigning is only going to get worse as his numbers plummet. He's got nothing.
What say ye?
Nick| 4.27.12 @ 6:39PM
Hi skip,
I'm don't wish to be so negative, and I do pray that I'm wrong. But, I prayed that Dole and McLame would win too. God does let bad things happen.
I'm only using my analytic skills to make a prediction based on the presidential contests of the past 50 years. Since, there is over 6 months until the election, I'll fully concede that anything could
happen to change my prediction. And, I have listed a few scenarios, but, they involve bad things happening to the nation, which I don't wish to occur.
I, and most of my family, will vote for Romney. I just don't think it will make a difference. Sorry.
W| 4.27.12 @ 7:17AM
Nick
Choices have consequences.
I would vote for Specter if he ran against Bob Casey Jr.. Casey beat Santorum by 18 points. I would have preferred a more conservative senator than Specter, but that was not the choice. The choice was Specter v. a lefty Dem in every election. I voted for Specter when he defeated five lefty Dems. Specter helped to confirm Justice Thomas, Roberts, and Alito. None of the Dems he beat in five races in Pa would have supported those three. Who are the most reliable anti abortion votes on the Court? Thomas, Roberts, Alito, and Scalia.
It is not a question of voting in the abstract. If your choice was Hillary v. Obama, who would you vote for? Now that is tough? Bill Clinton or Obama?
Now, the choice is Obama v. Romney, not some abstract classroom debate with no consequences. If someone cannot bring themselve to vote for Romney, that is his choice, but the consequence of that is helping Obama win because that is one less vote for Romney. That is the result of the choice. So, the question in the real world is will I help Obama win or Romney win.
Don't misunderstand me, I am not criticizing your principles.
Nick| 4.27.12 @ 7:17PM
W,
I don't know anything about Specter's previous opponents. And, I do understand the SCOTUS nominee arguments. But, Specter also voted against banning partial-birth abortion. He also voted against convicting Bubba "The Pervert" Clinton, in his senate trial.
If I had a choice between Specter and Casey, I would vote for Casey. Because, as I stated, the Right to Life is the issue for me. If the choice was between Shrillary and O'Bama, I would vote for someone else. I can't vote for a pro-abort candidate, no matter if there is an "R" or a "D" behind their name.
I think that you, and Skip and Todd S, are not understanding the point I was trying to make with those examples. I was trying to show that conservatives have a line that they won't cross, when it comes to supporting a candidate.
Otherwise, they're are just party people and their principles are extremely flexible.
Conservatives have a point beyond which, they will not be pushed. That point is different for each individual. That is all I was trying to show.
When Specter put the "D" after his name, he was called a traitor by party people. (Even though he had voted as a democrat during his long tenure.)
If Shrillary, as an extreme example, switched to the GOP, without changing one policy position, those same party people would embrace her with open arms. I would not.
My principles mean more to me than party loyalty. I guess, in that sense, you could call me an....independent!
(Whom I usually refer to as the dreaded independents, by the way.)
As I stated to Skip, I will vote for Romney strictly on the Right to Life issue. He won't be great for the sanctity of human life, neither was G.W. Bush, but, he'll be much better than O'Bama.
Please, read my replies to Skip and Todd S, for more elaboration.
Todd S| 4.27.12 @ 9:53AM
Nick,
You already stated you will vote for Romney even though he is not your ideal candidate because he is far preferable to Obama so I am not trying to criticize you really. I understand the disappointment felt by many by not getting a more conservative candidate after the 2010 elections, Romney was not really my preferred candidate despite my being Mormon. But he is the guy who won because nobody else could step up to the plate and get it done. Despite Romney's flaws, he is a better candidate than McCain and nobody can tell me otherwise. You bring up hypothetical situations but I am talking about the here and now.
And let us not beat around the bush, there are the conservatives who will not vote for him because of his religion and the other stuff is just a smokescreen. Should I respect the principles of what is basically religious bigotry? My position is that anyone who claims to be a conservative who will not vote against Obama because of their "principles" is giving up the fight foolishly because they are prideful. It is beyond stupid to say there is no real difference between Obama and Romney,
it is simply not true.
Nick| 4.27.12 @ 7:58PM
Todd S,
Yes, I'm disappointed that we are putting up McLame 2.0 in this election. And, Mr. Santorum was not my first choice, either. I was still mad at him for supporting Specter, in '04. And, I was pretty sure that a lot of other people were too.
But, let's be clear, Romney won because of his scorched-earth campaign, first against Mr. Gingrich, then against Rick. He broke Ronaldus Magnus' 11th Commandment, "Thou shall not speak ill of another Republican." So did many of his supporters, e.g. Coulter, Sununu, et al.
Also, the conservatives split the vote, and financial support available, yet again. These two reasons are why Romney won. I was willing to forgive Mr. Santorum when it came down to him, Newt, and Mitt. Because he was the one I trusted the most to govern as a conservative, despite his former mistakes.
So, some of my "badmouthing" can be attributed to all the false attacks on Mssrs. Santorum and Gingrich, I'll readily admit.
But, my analysis of how the election will end-up is solely based on a realistic and sober look at the facts, I assure you. I really don't see how Romney can get to 270+ electoral votes. A huge chunk of the conservative base is not going to vote for him.
And, yes, I won't deny that some of them won't vote for him because he is a Mormon. What can you or I do about that? It is a fact of life we have to live with, I'm afraid. It could badly affect down-ballot races in the Bible Belt, that is for sure.
Although, I don't know if you can classify all of them as religious bigots. Some of them could be woefully ignorant of the L.D.S. church. I, myself, prefer a baptized Christian as president. Even though I know that we have had an Unitarian, or two?, hold that office in the past. I really don't know if I could vote for a Moslem, for any office. Does that make me a religious bigot? I don't think so, based on the dictionary definition of the word.
Finally, how far apart O'Bama and O'Romney are on the issues really depends on far away you are from the two of them, wouldn't you agree? I mean, I'm so far right, that I don't see much difference between center-left, liberal, left, socialist, radical-left, and communist.
How you see the world all depends on where you are standing. To those who see no difference between the two, it is because they are focusing on all of the similarities. You have to admit, there are more than just a few, don't you?
This is what I was trying to get you guys to see. That those who won't vote for Romney do have their reasons for doing so. We had these same arguments after the '08 election, here, at AmSpec. They were pretty heated, too. There were many who saw no difference between McShame and O'Bama.
Plus, polling showed that the conservative vote was depressed in 'o8. Do you think those same people are going to have a change of heart this year? Please, see my replies to Skip and W, for more elaboration.
Cal| 5.15.12 @ 9:44PM
No, the economy is far from "terrible". Gas prices are not especially high. And claiming that Obama's reelection would be the end of our country just proves you're nuts.
Not Special Ops Bill| 4.26.12 @ 2:59PM
The ONE THING that hasn't been tried is to cut regulations on business and cut taxes in order to stimulate the economy.
Tom| 4.26.12 @ 6:06PM
I remember Roanld Reagan very well. I consider myself privelaged to have been able to vote for him twice. And Mitt Romney is NO Ronald Reagan!!!
crossworked| 4.26.12 @ 8:12PM
I never knew who Reagan was until his vision took hold of America. Many will note what Tom has said.
I guess you knew Ron. You will soon write books of Romney. Circumstances make history. We are about the best period to have ever happened.
crossworked| 4.26.12 @ 8:22PM
On the other hand I guess we need a theocracy that only holds those views you "know to be right" prevail.
Get off your ass and love something and never let it go.
Overeducated simplistic whitehouse non productive dames and dudes. What would you choose to die for or give your wealth to save a child
POST American| 4.26.12 @ 10:00PM
---Putting aside these 'authorized' 70's Show
DIS--tractions.
AGAIN, one and all MUST CHECK OUT
that latest JAY WEIDNER interview
on RED Ice radio
'Clash of Civilizations' pt. 2
(available off yahoo vids)
Lays out in compelling detail the capstone
plan to use --ISLAM as the religious component
to bring in the full-spectrum police state
and EUGENICS NWO. Using it from ALLLL
sides. The slave religion that IS submission
and thrives in prisons.
The PERFECT instrument for 'the next phase'.
-------ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL LISTENING------
Get it out to everyone!
And, finally, again, ARE we cleaning out,
or clearing out of our 'Counts-ILL of Churches'
rotten 'christian' churches ---YET????
This --IS-- the 11th hour.
TycheSD| 4.27.12 @ 12:27PM
Comparing Obama to Carter seems to be a Republican tactic in their strategy of portraying President Obama as a complete failure. As someone who lived during the Carter years, I don't see the similarity. Gas lines and hostages in Iran were much more acute problems than the ones we're dealing with today.
How does the GOP feel about the fact that Jimmy Carter told reporters the other day that he was fine with Romney as president?
Abu Nudnik| 4.27.12 @ 6:30PM
I hope you're right and change is in the air :) but Romney is not Reagan and Carter was a cute curiosity after the Nixon affair (like Obama after the Devil Bush) but Obama has much more charisma: dictatorial types always do. I hope you're right.
Ted R.| 4.28.12 @ 9:29AM
"President Barack Carter" - you know, it kind of has a nice ring to it - ! You know, as in
Well we tease'm a lot/'cause we/got'em on the spot/ Welcome BACK....
WELCOME BACK/WELCOME BACK/ WELCOME BAAAAACK...!
raoul | 4.30.12 @ 1:40PM
The Byrne Grant is part of the Recovery Act.