Barack Obama: The New Jimmy Carter

National Review Online: A Look Back At 1976 Election Gives Us Reason To Doubt Democrat's Sincerity

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Mark Moyar.

---

A newcomer to national politics, he claimed to transcend partisan labels. He moved to the center during the campaign, at a time when the Democrats held large congressional majorities. In a troubled economy, he told voters he would keep taxes down for most Americans, limit spending, and balance the budget, all while implementing ambitious social programs. He planned to cut military spending to free money for other purposes, but assured moderates and conservatives that when it came to America’s enemies, he would be tougher than the Republicans. The media, droves of moderates, and some conservatives believed him, having pegged him as a man of character.

His name was Jimmy Carter, the year was 1976, and he won. His presidency helps us predict the likely results of a Barack Obama victory in 2008.

What did the majority of 1976 get in return for its votes? Carter’s campaign vow to avoid increasing payroll taxes went out the window: He and Congress raised Social Security taxes through the roof. They also slapped large new taxes on oil and gas. Meanwhile, Carter canceled his plan for a tax refund to Americans earning under $30,000. Casting aside more campaign pledges, Carter and Congress increased annual federal spending from $403 billion to $579 billion and grew the national debt from $709 billion to $914 billion. Tens of billions of dollars went to new jobs programs, urban aid, and mushrooming entitlements, and Carter’s promise to stop Democratic pork-barrel spending was abandoned.

Carter and the Democratic Congress generated 18 percent inflation and economic stagnation at the same time. Unemployment rose. Americans came to regret the votes they had cast - Carter’s approval rating sank to 21 percent in 1980, the lowest in the history of polling.

Carter also threw out his professed hawkishness on foreign policy. Declaring America liberated from its “inordinate fear of Communism,” he sought better relations with the Communists in the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and Vietnam. He was much less nice to America’s allies, withdrawing support from those who did not accept his self-righteous demands for human-rights reforms. Friendly regimes in Nicaragua and Iran fell to hostile tyrants.

If Obama abandons his promises the way Carter did, his presidency will be even more dangerous. Carter at least had longstanding tendencies toward fiscal restraint, and he, together with a large block of conservative Democrats in Congress, prevented the most left-wing elements of Congress from taxing and spending even more. Obama, on the other hand, has himself been part of the most left-wing element in the U.S. Senate, and conservatives do not have a significant presence on the Democratic side of the Reid-Pelosi Congress. Also, Obama has no history of breaking with his party before this year.

There are reasons to believe Obama will indeed break his promises. In March, he told the American public he would force Canada and Mexico to make concessions on NAFTA. Obama’s senior economic adviser privately assured Canadian officials that Obama’s public promises were “more reflective of political maneuvering than policy.” In the ensuing months, Obama likewise sent contradictory messages to different audiences on such issues as taxes, Iraq, and crime.

In the second presidential debate, Obama made the most flagrant of his bogus promises yet, when he announced a “net spending cut.” The National Taxpayers Union has estimated that Obama will actually produce a net spending increase of at least $292 billion per year. Although the press would have pilloried John McCain for such a brazen falsehood, Obama took so little heat that he repeated it again at the third debate.

Also during the third debate, Obama distanced himself from ACORN, denying any involvement with this organization since 1995. But as Sen. McCain pointed out, the Obama campaign paid $832,000 to an ACORN subsidiary earlier this year. Most ominous for the future is Obama’s statement to the Heartland Presidential Forum - which consists of ACORN and other leftist “community organizations” - that as soon as he wins the election, “we'll be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda.”

Perhaps most incriminating of all is Joe Biden’s Seattle speech. In words that received less media attention than the “international testing” remarks, Biden asserted that an Obama administration would make unpopular decisions, because “if they're popular, they’re probably not sound.” As a consequence, “You all are going to be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls, why is the polling so down?’” In other words, Obama’s poll numbers will fall once Americans learn that his popular promises of 2008 have been supplanted in 2009 by actions that most Americans oppose.

Before casting a vote for Obama, Americans must consider the likelihood that he will follow the path of Jimmy Carter - that he will wreck the fragile economy by reneging on promises to cut taxes and spending, that he will be tough on America’s allies and soft on its enemies. The odds of Obama staying true to his current rhetoric are so poor that not even the boldest gambler should bet on it.

[loublain]

In case you were too busy writing to notice the market... the economy IS wrecked, and Bush and his friends have embraced socialism to save it. It may be Halloween season, but trying to scare folks with the prospect of inflation in the face of a market which is down 40 percent in a year is a bit weak. As far as taxes go... Bush and Congress have given out early Christmas presents to the tune of 1 Trillion dollars.. and sent the bill to US!!. of course taxes will rise. either that or we will become a subsidiary of China and Japan when they call our debt.

[imnho]

Reality always causes a president to temper his policy goals. There are rarely enought votes to get an agenda passed unscathed. That is the nature of American politics. There is no doubt that the next president will be tested both in domestic and foregin policy. That comes with the job. I feel that the best person to handle the chalanges that are to come is Obama.

It must really frustrate the NRO to see a poltical tsunami coming and know that it is too late to do anything about it. Its now not a question of who, but of how much.

[Razzl]

Exactly what is the deterministic mechanism that makes the Carter presidency somehow the only model for an Obama presidency? How does Moyar make the leap of declaring that if Jimmy Carter and Congress didn''t keep all of their promises 30 years ago that Obama will therefore break his promises today? Is NRO claiming that all promises are unkeepable (in which case, McCain''s are equally suspect), or just promises made by Democrats? And if the latter, what is the basis for that claim? Why does Obama get chained down to just Jimmy Carter in the karmic cycle? Why don''t we get to choose some other president as an example of how things will go under Obama, like say, JFK or FDR? Moyar''s irrational partisan faith-based reasoning here isn''t exactly the stuff the magazine was built on...

[ubrew12]

Ahh, the Carter years. Those years of fiscal pause before Reagan blew a hole in the budget. So, Carter raised taxes, did he?

Did he raise the taxes of people living today? Cuz thats what Reagan did, to much NRO applause, by tripling the national debt. And we''ve spent $1 trillion of our tax dollars just paying the INTEREST on the Reagan debt since he left office. The Reagan debt is the gift that TRULY keeps on giving.

Carter raised taxes because he believed in paying his way. It cost him reelection. His loss cost us MUCH, MUCH more. The debt is now $10 trillion, and is going to enslave an entire generation of Americans just coming into their earning years. I hope Reagan and the NRO rot in h*ll for their populist advocacy of debt as a vehicle for ''economic growth''. Profoundly unAmerican.

[glidescube]

The New carter is Obama? Well if given the choice between 4 years of Carter or 4 more years of Bush which way would you rather go?

[idnnsg]

The NRO is desperate. Every day they give us another reason to "fear Obama". Step one: assume something that is NOT true. Step two: argue that it is a terrible, bad thing. Step three: accuse Obama.

It won''t work. Everyone with half a brain knows the "new" McCain is NO GOOD FOR THIS COUNTRY! Even his advisors are starting to bail!

Face facts, guys: the GOP is toast!

McCain is old and confused. Every day he says something that flat out contradicts what he previously said. Flip, flop, flip, flop...
By his own admission, he doesn''t know ANYTHING about the economy. He still thinks "Joe the Plumber" is a "typical hard working middle class guy", rather than the lying, tax-evading, unlicensed, republican plant who, nevertheless, would SAVE taxes if he voted for Obama.

Palin is young and confused. And a religious nut-case. She thinks she''s "joe six-pack", but how many average joes do you know who spend $150,000 in 6 weeks for clothes and makeup? How many do you know that are under investigation for ethics violations? How many do you know who want to get their hands on the nuke buttons to blow up the entire world to "bring back jesus"?

This election, let''s all say NO THANKS to McCain and Palin. They just aren''t good for America. Vote for Obama. At least he SANE!

[suzyku]

Good God you people are stupid! Take your mccain/palin idiots and go away, far far away from the decent people in this country! you idiots are nasty, unethical, lack integrity and don''t know the truth from your rear ends!

[pvperson]

Carter, in the last days of the election with Reagan, used the same call that McCain is using, that Reagan would be tested as a new president. Based on that, I think maybe McCain is "The New Carter"

[davide73-2009]

What a dismal choice. A promising man who needs another decade of experience before running for the Presidency versus a once good man who is now led around by people who put profits before patriotism. I still think it should have been Mike Huckabee.

[enriquecaliente]

Ah the beauty of TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMY.

[memerider]

Our choices are not the best in this election. A Romney vs. Clinton election would have been a lot more comforting. But these candidates were damaged by extremists in their parties.

Whichever duo wins, we the people need to limit their ability to undercut all of the constitution, and strap them with a congress of the opposing party at our earliest convenience to keep them in check.

Faith-based funding; failed (and unconstitutional) gun control; unconstitutional and illegal spying on citizens, searches, and seizures all need to go. We need to move away from autocracy and back to our democratic republic and our constitution.

[elz523]

Surprise, surprise, another straw man argument from the NRO. What they lack in integrity they make up for in stupidity.

[noloyalisti]

Jimmy Carter was so right about our energy policy and need for alternatives like solar power. Of course Ray Gun came in and short circuited those efforts because there was no money in it for his fascist corporate friends.

Carter was one of the most effective negotiators for middle east peace, in fact he won a Peace Prize.

I think the difference with Obama is that we have had 8 years of stomping on the constitution and very damaging cowboy diplomacy. The right wing ideology of privatization and fascism have progressed to a huge degree. I think Obama is more dynamic and has the younger energy to get things changed in the right direction. I don''t envy his situation, especially with the right wing fascist media blasting away at him.

[hober_mallow]

I''d rather have a new Jimmy Carter as opposed to a new George Bush !!

[stopkidding]

Part of what is wrong with America today -- not that people write this stuff -- but that there are people paying for them to write this stuff. My bartender is better on political history than Moyar.

[tejasdemo]

Another completely inane "article" from the national nazi.

GTH

[timothyone-2009]

We couldn''t do better than a Jimmy Carter, now that many Americans are now aware of the right-wing conspiracy and their influence on the media. They won''t be as able to destroy THIS Jimmy Carter.
The fact is, Jimmy Carter was an extremely good man and a great President who was simply overpowered and over-slimed by the far-right and it''s lap dog media.

[mtkoren-2009]

KathySun seems to be monopolizing this. The author of this article is a brilliant Viet Name war scholar. Not sure what else other than brilliant marks in college at Harvard. But his thesis is that because Jimmy and Obama were/are both relatively young to politics with a liberal slant to their beliefs, Obama will follow Jimmy''s path. And lie and change and so on and he points to a few specifics where Obama seemed to change positions. As if nobody else has done at least as much changing as he supposedly did and which was supposedly just like Jimmy.

Mark Moyar might be right, but it is as big a logical fallacy as any I''ve seen. His conclusion jumps so far from a few possible coincidences that the author not only undermines his narrow reputation, but flirts with behavior that has typified not only the wildly irresponsible statements by the GOP of late and the distortions that the Bush administration has been making since it started in office under the big W.

[mtkoren-2009]

KathySun seems to be monopolizing this. The author of this article is a brilliant Viet Nam war scholar. Not sure what else other than brilliant marks and recommendations while in college at Harvard.

His thesis here is that because Jimmy and Obama were/are both relatively young to politics, with a liberal slant to their beliefs, and some changes of heart, Obama will follow Jimmy''s path. And lie and change and so on and he points to a few specifics where Obama seemed to change positions. As if nobody else has done at least as much changing as he supposedly did and which was supposedly just like Jimmy.

Mark Moyar might be right, but it is as big a logical fallacy as any I''ve seen. His conclusion jumps so far from a few possible coincidences that the author not only undermines his narrow reputation, but flirts with behavior that has typified not only the wildly irresponsible statements by the GOP of late and the distortions that the Bush administration has been making since it started in office under the big W.

[mtkoren-2009]

KathySun seems to be monopolizing this. The author of this article is a brilliant Viet Nam war scholar. Not sure what else other than brilliant marks and recommendations while in college at Harvard.

His thesis here is that because Jimmy and Obama were/are both relatively young to politics, with a liberal slant to their beliefs, and some changes of heart, Obama will follow Jimmy''s path. And lie and change and so on and he points to a few specifics where Obama seemed to change positions. As if nobody else has done at least as much changing as he supposedly did and which was supposedly just like Jimmy.

Mark Moyar might be right, but it is as big a logical fallacy as any I''ve seen. His conclusion jumps so far from a few possible coincidences that the author not only undermines his narrow reputation, but flirts with behavior that has both typified the wildly irresponsible statements by the GOP of late and the distortions that the Bush administration has been making since it started in office under the big W.

[puldr]

Jimmy Carter had the unfortunate circumstance of the Iranian hostage crisis. But since leaving the presidency has done more good than all the Republican ex-presidents combined!

[smclimans]

Today on my way to lunch, I passed a homeless guy sitting
on the sidewalk with the extra advertisement
"Vote Obama, I need the money".
I laughed.

In the restaurant,
the waiter had an Obama ''08 button with his Obama necktie.
Again I laughed.

When the $12 lunch bill came, I explained to the waiter
that I was testing the Obama wealth redistribution concept.
He stood there, dumbstruck and MAD, as I told him I would be
giving his tip to the homeless guy outside who needed it more.
The waiter trotted off pissed, while the homeless guy
was thrilled that he receieved money he didnt EARN!

Just a short lesson in Obama socialist economics.
Great story, huh? (and true) just happened
Try it yourself in the next few days!


ANYONE WHO THINKS I WAS BEING MEAN,

I got the "spread the wealth" idea from OBAMA

[incog-nito]

KathySun: Looks like you''ve got this whole forum all for yourself. Have fun.

[norepubs]

I can see that all of the posters on this board paid by the RNC seem to have a ''crystal ball'' that they can see the future with.......
Where was the ''crystal ball'' that could''ve predicted the disaster that is the eight years of the Bu$h Presidency?
We could''ve used such a prediction that republicans were going to steal every dollar that wasn''t nailed down. But that''s what we wound up with,folks.
A vote for Obama will help end the lies, thievery,and skullduggery that has been the unspoken platform of the criminal republican party.....
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

[norepubs]

........That''s exactly what we will get if McLAme is elected Pre$ident....



14. More 4 more years of Bush, even when Bush is not running.

[gotravel1]

Mark Moyar,Why aren''t you on the front page of every paper and being blasted on the airwaves! What you just wrote in your article is what I''ve been trying to convey to people for weeks!Since the MSM media won''t address this,somehow you''ve got to find a louder forum to wake America up before they vote us down the tubes.I appeal to you to get this message out to as many columnsas you can,and try to get the media to bring your message to the forefront.This is precisely why Obama has been trying to "Rock the Vote" with the young people because they didn''t experience a Carter disaster. Please do all you can to move this message forward.

[norepubs]

Actually, you can blame that cretin Ronald Reagan for making it a big tax advantage for corporations to export American jobs overseas. REagan, the stupid,senile shill for big business actually duped the gullible american public into thinking he was on their side with his "service economy" B.S.
.............................................................................................................


Thank you Democratic Party for the great job you have done in Northeastern Ohio, 35 years ,mainly Mahoning County, all that open area now is great for the environmentalist, what used to be Steel Plants, pipe plants, industrial area, what a great use of the EPA. Also big spots of were homes used to be. Thank you Again Eco-Liberal Democrats.

[rk131-2009]

Obviously, those who have the false impression that drilling for oil and pouring toxic chemicals into the oceans and polluting the air with all of the CO2 that is created when fussil fuels are burned are a better option than looking at alternatives just are unable to use abstract reasoning to consider where this will lead our planet. Selfishness and ignorance are apparent in every facet of the Republican party. Furthermore, it will take years to find sites to drill, actually reach these resources, and turn the crude oil into a refined product. Plus, those fossil fuel desposits are not finite. They WILL run out. Perhaps not for twenty years, but AT SOME POINT, the WELLS WILL GO DRY, and the supply of oil will be gone. If we allow short sighted people, such as McCain, run our government we will really be in tough shape when that happens.

[wontread]

Why is%u2019 not Gov Sarah Plain, not qualified for VP, when Gov George Bush was a governor, Jimmy Carter was a Governor, Gov Bill Clinton was a Governor, Gov Ronald Reagan was a Governor. If these men can be President, Why can%u2019t Gov Sarah Plain be VP?

Posted by KathySun at 09:19 PM : Oct 24, 2008

Jimmy Carter was a governor for 4 years and a state senator for two terms.

Clinton was a governor for 12 years.

Reagan was a governor for 8 years.

George Bush was in his second term as governor when he ran for the presidency. The record though probably demonstrates that he was not actually qualified or suited for the presidency.

Sarah Palin has been a governor for less than two years.

Which one of these is not like the other?

[rk131-2009]

Are you kidding me? Why isn''t she qualified to be VP? I wouldn''t let her take care of my beta fish let alone the country! She doesn''t even have a clue what a VP does.


Why is%u2019 not Gov Sarah Plain, not qualified for VP, when Gov George Bush was a governor, Jimmy Carter was a Governor, Gov Bill Clinton was a Governor, Gov Ronald Reagan was a Governor. If these men can be President, Why can%u2019t Gov Sarah Plain be VP?

Posted by KathySun at 09:19 PM : Oct 24, 2008

Jimmy Carter was a governor for 4 years and a state senator for two terms.

Clinton was a governor for 12 years.

Reagan was a governor for 8 years.

George Bush was in his second term as governor when he ran for the presidency. The record though probably demonstrates that he was not actually qualified or suited for the presidency.

Sarah Palin has been a governor for less than two years.

Which one of these is not like the other?

[rk131-2009]

Having all the experience in the world does NOT mean that she is qualified nor that she is the RIGHT person for the job.

Why is%u2019 not Gov Sarah Plain, not qualified for VP, when Gov George Bush was a governor, Jimmy Carter was a Governor, Gov Bill Clinton was a Governor, Gov Ronald Reagan was a Governor. If these men can be President, Why can%u2019t Gov Sarah Plain be VP?

Posted by KathySun at 09:19 PM : Oct 24, 2008

Jimmy Carter was a governor for 4 years and a state senator for two terms.

Clinton was a governor for 12 years.

Reagan was a governor for 8 years.

George Bush was in his second term as governor when he ran for the presidency. The record though probably demonstrates that he was not actually qualified or suited for the presidency.

Sarah Palin has been a governor for less than two years.

Which one of these is not like the other?

[westtexas8]

loubakin,
agreed.
ubrew12,
I also lived through the carter years. I rememeber that he wanted to raise taxes to pay for our expenses.I also rememebr a quote from Cheney saying Reagan proved one could run a government and win elections with deficits. Great post.

[westtexas8]

KathySun,
The democrats are indeed hoping for unions to once again energize the labor market. I hope there is a democratic sweep, perhaps we can all go to work.We need not implement just clean coal or nuclear power.
Wind power in Texas , solar power in Arizona. Money for a national grid would all create new jobs. In addition, the R&D behind such technology would create jobs. Wind and Solar can be implemented in other areas as well as these two alone will not power the grids. New battery technology for vehicles. Federal moey for hydrogen refueling stations for vehicles already created. These could also provide jobs. We have to be unafraid of the idea of federal money being the seed money for these projects. All of the GOP screaming about Carter, socialism, and the real fear of high taxes is stopping the country. Think about what will happen with more of the GOP policies in place... I have more faith in the american people than the GOP apparently. After all the GOP trusted the business moguels to practive "capitalism" ad where are we? Keep in mind that the credit scam was an admendmet to the bill allowing "lower income" to borrow. But thanks to the GOP the "lower income" are the bogeyman. I will gladly take a chance on the "regular joe or jane", thanks.

[progres_sive]

Kathysun has pointed out all the pitfalls of a President Barack Obama but failed to state ONE reason why I should vote for McCain/Palin.

[darrren12000]

Interestingly, this editorial NEVER mentions the 70s oil price shocks - which make our recent troubles with oil look silly. MOst of the economic turmoil in the Carter administration was caused by OPEC. The price of oil almost tripled in about one month. The impact on the economy was tremendous. I''m a Democrat - and I do not blame Bush for the financial crisis today. Congress (primarily) and Presidents (secondarily) control fiscal policy - not the price of oil or the flow of credit.

[ktorrent]

LOL. All the great Obama talk is starting to slow down. I guess he isn''t the icon everyone thinks. The other side of the coin is coming out. People are blinking at the idea of voting for Obama, because it is becoming clearer that he is not real.

[xlib]

Ah, the good old days of gas rationing, high interest rates AND high unemployment of the carter years. Why, I remember the speech written by your own chris mathews (he of the tingle down my leg) blaming the American public for being greedy, etc, etc. I remember waiting patiently for the oil delivery man to come and fill our tank with our newborn son. Oh yea, the good old 70''s.
I think I still have our canning supplies and lanterns, and lots of canles. We have a wood burning stove with lots of wood, Oh yea, ready for the good old days to return. I just wish we still lived on our upstate Pennsylvania farm so we could grow our own food. It would be comforting to be back with those racist, rednecks. Thanks murtha, you''re a real sweetie.

[dragonfly125]

Obama will never begin to compare with Jimmy Carter.
Pres. Carter is one of the few morally grounded men
to have served in the White House. Obama''s history,
affiliations and 20 year relationship with Rev. Wright and his support of Wm. Ayers puts Obama in
a very different league morally and ethically.
Of course morals and ethics don''t sell newspapers or
on line advertising..........so the media is supporting Obama and all the money he is putting into
the media coffers with his ads.

[dragonfly125]

I wonder how many million Obama has spent with CBS,
ABC and the NY Times in advertising dollars??

[ubrew12]

Foreign oil imports were reduced by 50% during the Carter administration, and he began many programs to develop energy independence and alternative energy.

I wish we had continued his energy policies. This country would be MUCH better off, and wouldn''t be throwing away trillions each year to purchase foreign oil. But they required an activist government, engaged in energy policy, not a policy written by the oil companies, which is what Republicans prefer.

[aakalan]

Don''t you wish!

Carter as prologue to Obama? Where in heaven (or otherwise) do you get that? Totally different people, totally different life experiences, totally different temperament, totally different times.

You''re so desperate for -anything- to bash Obama with, you''ll stretch things so far that rationality has no place in your highly-biased, hawkish, rich-white-men worldview.

I feel so bad for you. In less than two weeks, you will become what you really are: irrelevant.

Thank God.

[kazoodan]

...55 Miles Per Hour NATIONAL SPEED LIMIT...

AND the start of NOT BEING ABLE TO DRILL FOR OUR OWN OIL!!!

OBAMA the "SOCIALIST" in 08 for the 2nd CARTER TERM!!!

Thank you Democratic Party for not letting us drill for oil the unemployment RATE is 6.7%.
Thank you Democratic Party for the great job you have done in Northeastern Ohio, 35 years ,mainly Mahoning County, all that open area now is great for the environmentalist, what used to be Steel Plants, pipe plants, industrial area, what a great use of the EPA. Also big spots of were homes used to be. Thank you Again Eco-Liberal Democrats.

Posted by KathySun at 07:17 PM : Oct 24, 2008

None of this would have ever entered your tiny brain if you hadn''t heard it from the right wing mouthpieces. Your entire thought process consists of copy and paste.

[sparks224]

The NRO supported George W Bush.

Enough said.

[imnho]

It appears that electoral swimming was never Macain speciality. Bush is like an albatross around Macain''s neck. A this point his campagin is treading water as it sinks out of site. If history does not throw Macain a life preserver that he will sink into the history of electoral losers. In the electoral college second place is the first loser.

[andor3]

the thing NRO wants us to forget ts that Carter was a great President, but ahead of his time and America. If we had followed Carters ideas on reducing foreign oil dependence, moving to national security through economic power more than military, and encouraging smart technology, we would be leading the world economy today. Instead, we chose Reagan who reversed all the progress and disarmed all the safeguards and balances built-in, sacrificing security for a short-term economic bubble.

[photogeezer]

Carter had to fight Congress at every step. Obama will have a Democratic majority. We can''t go on leaving people on rooftops, homeless and without health care. Any humane society takes care of its people. Any humane society must have some socialistic features. Unrestrained capitalism is every bit as collossal a failure as Communism. We''re going to fix this. It will cost money. Get over it. If you can''t lend a constructive hand in the new administration, get out of the way.

[liceu93]

No, Barack Obama IS NOT, I repeat, IS NOT, the new Jimmy Carter! Jimmy Carter has the dubious distinction to be the only Democratic presidential candidate that I did not vote for, either time. First, I voted to give Gerald Ford a full term and then when Carter ran again, I voted for John Anderson.

Unlike Carter, Obama is a unifyer. He has already in his campaign shown a remarkable ability to inspire and bring together people of differing races, educational levels, and incomes together. There is no reason to believe that if he''s elected he won''t do that with his administration. Carter, by contrast, distanced himself from those in his own party. Loyal Democrats were made to feel that some how they weren''t as good as the Georgia gang that came into town with Carter. In that way, the candidate who''s most like Carter, is Gov. Palin. I mean no disrepect to former President Carter when I say that, I know that for all of his faults, he''s a much smarter, more decent and more honest human being than Gov. Palin.

In addition to not being as divisive a person as Carter, Obama is a much more inspiring leader and speaker. Honestly, even when I agreed with him, listening to a Carter speech was about as exciting as watching paint dry. I was invited to the Carter Inaugural and what stands out most in my mind was the odd sensation of almost falling asleep on my freezing cold feet on the Capitol grounds.
So, please, please, don''t equate Carter with Obama.

[Redoubt]

I''m no fan of Barky Obama but this seems a rediculous comparrison.

It seems that perhaps CBS is right and the GOP is getting just a little desperate.

[caldwellptr]

If you continue the comparison of then and now, Carter was elected after Nixon tried to subvert the politcal process in a power grab which resulted in his resignation and Ford becoming President, the only President who was not elected to the office.

[neonink]

Jimmy Carter is no longer classified as one of America''s worst presidents.

King George W. Bush did Carter a favor by being the worst.

Carter is a genius in comparison.