View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong
|
Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:17 pm Post subject: Carter dropping hints of an Obama endorsement? |
|
|
I just recieved this via an email list:
Former President Jimmy Carter was in Nigeria with his
wife Rosalynn and made the following statement:
"We are very interested in the primaries. Don't forget
that Obama won in my state of Georgia. My town which
is home to 625 people is for Obama, my children and
their spouses are pro-Obama. My grandchildren are also
pro-Obama. As a Super Delegate, I would not disclose
who I am rooting for but I leave you to make that
guess," he said.
http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=107611# |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
crlb2006

Joined: 03 Mar 2008 Location: Seongbuk-gu, Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
I dont think this would do Obama any good at all.
One of the few left-leaning constituants Obama still lags with is the jews, and god knows they are not taken with Jimmy C and his not-too-cool with Israel posture.
Also surely won't help with 'good government' type moderates, as Carter was one shitty president.
A common argument I hear against Obama is "he'll be the next Jimmy Carter" (nice guy, overwhelmed by presidency) |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005 Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jimmy Carter was the best Democratic President of the 20th Century. He wasn't very good, but he was the best of the lot. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
ontheway determined:
Quote: |
Jimmy Carter was the best Democratic President of the 20th Century. He wasn't very good, but he was the best of the lot. |
Tell me your kidding; I suppose Wilson, FDR, and Truman had nothing on the peanut farmer.
Carter's endorsement hasn't come as a surprise but I'd rather Obama distance himself from Jimmy of Plains.
And now we have word of Hanoi Jane Fonda putting in her two cents worth. Another Hollywood celeb he should distance himself from. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
ontheway wrote: |
Jimmy Carter was the best Democratic President of the 20th Century. He wasn't very good, but he was the best of the lot. |
Well, I think people think that Jimmy Carter was a man of integrity. I don't know how good he was as a president, but at least he had Camp David under his belt, but, in reality, that was the brainchild of Kissinger under Nixon. People have some respect for Carter at least as a person.
Bill Clinton was viewed as a far more effective president than Carter.
Carter was president at a very difficult time, and the hostage crisis didn't help. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005 Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wilson dragged the US into WWI which we should have stayed out of. He gave us the Federal Income Tax that has helped to make our economy and the world economy much smaller than it could have been. He gave us the Federal Reserve that has destroyed 97% of the dollar's value and caused the onset of the Great Depression. Great President.
FDR gave US the evil Social Security program which has prevented the creation of a minimum of 200 million good jobs around the world. He robbed the people of their gold, permanently devalued the dollar at his personal whim, and caused the recession started by the Wilson's Federal Reserve to become the Great Depression.
Clinton was lucky to inherit the improving economy that was the result of minor tax code improvements made Reagan and the fortunate effects of decades of growth of the free market inspite of the government. Clinton gets credit for an economy that was strong due to that other famous Bill of Microsoft (Bill Gates) and the other American free market entrepreneurs.
Clinton was probably the most corrupt President of the 20th Century. He sold the governorship in Ark. to the highest bidder. The bribes were paid to Hillary's Rose Law Firm partners and he did the favors. If Monica hadn't saved him by taking the Starr investigation off track, Bill would have been impeached and convicted for his Arkansas corruption.
Truman - 2nd best Dem President of the 20th Century, after Carter.
Jimmy Carter inherited the bad economy he was blamed for from the disaster created by Johnson and Nixon and the Federal Reserve. He didn't do much, but he was the Dems' best. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stillnotking

Joined: 18 Dec 2007 Location: Oregon, USA
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Heh. If Carter's endorsement is going to hurt Obama, what's Bush's endorsement going to do to McCain? He's both less popular and more relevant than Jimmuh.
Seriously, the campaign against McCain practically writes itself. His favorable poll numbers won't last through the end of August and he'll be lucky to get 45% of the vote in November. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The recent Republican primaries vote results for Ron Paul show that ontheway's analysis of history is the view of something like 6% of the people. In other words, not very relevant. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jimmy Carter was the Democratic Bush.
The man took all his buddies from Georgia and gave them Cabinet positions. This poverty of judgment extended to instituting price fixes on gasoline, which caused oil shortages, and signing away the Panama Canal for nothing in return.
Today his rants and ravings are published on the news, because he once held the office of President.
The man is a mockery and a disgrace. FDR > Carter hands down. And I'm not too fond of FDR. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone who thinks FDR was on balance a great president regardless of party affiliation is either willful or just blame ignorant of American history. Case closed. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemcgarrett wrote: |
Anyone who thinks FDR was on balance a great president regardless of party affiliation is either willful or just blame ignorant of American history. Case closed. |
Well, obviously, people of your grandparents' generation thought otherwise in many cases and he was voted for thrice. I think Americans of that time period were sensible. However, you are saying you are more sensible. FDR's programs helped many people at a very bad time in American history, and his leadership was decent during wartime. He is one of America's revered presidents.... Ignorant of your take on American history you mean?
FDR all the way... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005 Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
The recent Republican primaries vote results for Ron Paul show that ontheway's analysis of history is the view of something like 6% of the people. In other words, not very relevant. |
When Columbus sailed to India by going West, something like 6% of the world believed that the world might be round instead of flat. Their view was not very relevant. Correct of course, but not very relevant.
Anyone who doesn't know that FDR was an evil fascist whose policies have been a major factor in creating all the problems we have today is clueless about economics and history. Being a professor, an author, a "historian" or even being in the majority doesn't make you not stupid.
Supporters of FDR, national health care, government programs of all kinds, are sitting on their brains looking backward and declaring themselves progressive. They have been de-educated by the government controlled schools. The "majority" has become a mass of servants; serfs in the vast fascist socialist fiefdom that is America today. Serfs so numbed by the entertainment soma they consume daily and living in such self-satisfied mass delusion, that they will remain blissfully unaware of their servitude throughout their lifetimes. They even post and blog about how good their masters treat them on the modern American plantation.
If Yata is right, and 6% of the American population has woken up and realizes the truth, then that is good news. The fascist, socialist, communist government is in trouble. It only takes 15% to win.
Even in revolutionary times, such as the American revolution, only 15% of the people rise up. Another 15% comprises the ruling elite and its coopted paid cadre, mercenaries, and deluded followers. 70%, the majority, sit by with little awareness of events and uninvolved. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Adventurer wrote: |
stevemcgarrett wrote: |
Anyone who thinks FDR was on balance a great president regardless of party affiliation is either willful or just blame ignorant of American history. Case closed. |
Well, obviously, people of your grandparents' generation thought otherwise in many cases and he was voted for thrice. I think Americans of that time period were sensible. However, you are saying you are more sensible. FDR's programs helped many people at a very bad time in American history, and his leadership was decent during wartime. He is one of America's revered presidents.... Ignorant of your take on American history you mean?
FDR all the way... |
I don't think Steve is ignorant of history nor is he ignorant of economics. Do you understand how misguided FDR's policies were? Social Security, for instance, was a scheme first implemented by Otto Von Bismark in the late 19th century Germany. The idea was to create a national pension system for older people who could not work, except the scheme was much more sinister. You see the average German at the time barely lived to be 40 years old yet the aristocracy lived well into their 70's. Von Bismark was clever enough to understand this so he made the age 65 years old to collect. Therefore, German peasants had to pay into this system even though they would never get a dime back while the aristocracy enjoyed the fruits of the peasants' labor.
Fast forward to 1933 America, when the average life expectancy was 58 years old. Wait a minute, how much do you know about history? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Social security has worked. If congress hadn't taken used its funds over the years, we wouldn't be as in bad shape as we are now.
And you can't deny FDR's intelligence or leadership skills. Criticize his economic policy all you want, but he did lead us through some difficult times. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Even Reagan backed FDR enthusiastically. He backed Truman too and always maintained that "I didn't leave the Democratic Party; it left me."
Truman was nearly a great president too in my view, and steely-eyed against Stalin unlike FDR.
Nothing wrong with social security although it was initially intended as a stop-gap measure but like all bureaucracies it burgeoned. If they can reform it, I'm still all for it. That and Head Start are two social welfare programs we've benefited from, in my view. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|