June 10, 2008

Welcome Back Carter

Despite the hopes of Democrats, the economy isn't going to tank, at least not unless Barack Obama gets into the White House.

While the media would like to help along the meme that McCain's financial plan of low taxes and lowered government spending is a continuation of Bush's economy, that is fiction. McCain's policies are in line with Ronald Reagan's successful conservative economic plans; of the two Presidential candidates, it is Obama's plan that is more like those practiced by Bush.

The bloated government and increased spending seen under the Bush Administration is horrific from a fiscally conservative standpoint, and a prequel to what would occur if the ultra-liberal Obama campaign lives up to its promises, creating more than $87 billion in new government and entitlements. Obama will need to substantially raise taxes to fulfill even some of his campaign promises.

Think Bush is bad? Obama will be worse, pulling for "higher income taxes, Social Security taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes," and taxes on job-creating small businesses straight out of the "dazed and malaised" days of James Earl Carter's failed one-term Presidency. I'm sure I am not alone in hearing from parents concerned that an Obama presidency will ruin the economy for their children.

This is just on the home front, where Obama thinks he's strongest. Overseas, Obama is even more of a dismal failure.

We are not losing in Iraq, despite the best efforts of Democrats in Congress and on the Presidential campaign trial. Oh, they've certainly tried, but the war is actually progressing well enough that a Iraqi Sunni sheik is pressing to go to Afghanistan to help fight al Qaeda there. He trusts America. Democrats? Not so much.

As for Iran, the mullah's no doubt salivate at the possibility of an Obama presidency, and the reasons why are obvious.

They seek to exploit Obama's status as a foreign policy naif pledged to a campaign of pacifism to recreate the glory days of their Islamic Revolution. I'd remind you that these were their glory days due in no small part due to Carter's ineffectual Presidency, which Obama is already emulating with his stated policy of unconditional talks with tyrants. Other strongmen in the region also smell Obama's fear, which is why they are actively campaigning for him.

He's a well-rounded candidate, the first-term senator from Illinois. Obama's foreign policy is equally incompetent as are his domestic policies, all of which are as bad or worse than that of the thirty-ninth President.

Higher taxes. Bigger government. Intrusive regulations.

Welcome Back, Carter.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at June 10, 2008 11:52 AM

What? Where? When?

Posted by: Dan Irving at June 10, 2008 01:09 PM

Isn't the comparison between Snobama and Carter insulting to Carter?

Posted by: Thomas Jackson at June 10, 2008 03:40 PM

BHO is a leftist liberal product of corrupt Chicago politics who hypocritically preaches all kinds of platitudes for others but in his public life has failed to demonstrate with his own actions. What happened to his “Old Uncle Wright”- dumped! – His church of 20 years – dumped! A real steady guy. He will do and say whatever it takes to get the prize. The history of his political rise in Chicago is ugly. His record in the Illinois legislature and later in the US Senate contains absolutely nothing but a record of doing what is politically expedient. BHO is a product of “Old Line Politics”. :”Change”:- into what? . Judge a man by his actions not his words.

He will spend spend - Changes for sure!

Posted by: ratfink at June 10, 2008 04:04 PM

Obama is for change! The change in your pocket and the change in your bank account. He's a big government, nanny state, tax and wastefully spend corrupt Chicago politician.

The sad part is that most of the kids who worship him were born after the disastrous Carter administration. The concept of double digit inflation and unemployment is completely foreign to them. They are now bitching about unemployment rates that Billy Jeff Clinton road to re-election back in 1996.

Posted by: Mark at June 10, 2008 06:01 PM
“You know one of his favorite phrases is that I would be a Bush third term. Well I think maybe his proposals could be a Carter second term,” McCain told Fox.

I think McCain just found a campaign slogan. :)

Posted by: C-C-G at June 10, 2008 07:17 PM


Only 87 Billion? I believe Nationalized Health Care will be just slightly higher than that number by itself (sarcastic understatement).

Posted by: Mark at June 10, 2008 07:51 PM

In light of your comments about Reagan and Carter and GW and debt and all that, I suggest you wander over to White House's Office of Management and Budget Historical Table 7.1. Take a gander at what the data actually looks like as opposed to what you think or want it to look like.

Clearly your setup knows what the data looks like - it wouldn't let me embed the link telling me the content is questionable.

(Go to whitehouse dot gov forward slash omb forward slash budget forward slash budget forward slash fy2009 forward slash hist.html.)

Posted by: cactus at June 11, 2008 04:12 AM

Carter. Republicans would rather shoot themselves in the head or maybe some other part of their anatomy rather than admit that if we followed Carter on energy we would be laughing all the way to the gas pump now.
slow down,turn down the thermostat,develop alternatives..We would have two years of energy freedom rihgt now and a robust industry to boot...

Posted by: I hope we can at June 11, 2008 07:24 AM

Carter, Hope, do either of you remember the term "stagflation"?

Go look it up. Then tell me, honestly, that you want to go back to economic conditions where that word would start to be used again.

Posted by: C-C-G at June 11, 2008 07:56 AM

Hope were you aware that Carter torpedoed the American domestic nuclear power industry, at the behest of his big oil-company donors? Imagine how much more energy-independant we would be now except for that little bit of quid-pro-quo at the nation's expense.

Posted by: DaveP. at June 11, 2008 10:11 AM

His Democratic friends are saying ..

No oil to invest in. They know ExxonMobil is making a filthy killing in this energy crisis, but what galls them even more is the knowledge that ExxonMobil can’t spend any of its $40 billion in profits to find American oil in the most obvious places.

Maybe they should contact their Democratic friends on Capitol Hill and tell them.

Posted by: Neo at June 11, 2008 11:11 AM
Hope were you aware that Carter torpedoed the American domestic nuclear power industry, at the behest of his big oil-company donors? Imagine how much more energy-independant we would be now except for that little bit of quid-pro-quo at the nation's expense.

Interesting assertion, DaveP.

Please provide your evidence backing up that assertion.

Don't tell me to look it up myself, I don't play that game... no matter what I find you'd just claim that I didn't get the right article. Also, it is logically impossible to prove a negative, so I can't prove that there is no evidence of what you say; therefore the onus is upon you to provide the proof of your statement.

Don't spin, that won't work. I asked a simple question, I expect a simple answer. Where did you find the evidence for your statement above?

Posted by: C-C-G at June 11, 2008 05:35 PM


Very nice putdown. The next meme we will be subjected to is that Bush sold out to the fast food industry. In exchange for preventing drilling in Alaska and building new refineries Bush pushed the use of grease for fuel. There are billions to be made. Think of what happens when Bush agrees to allow using the oil from Neo's zits as fuel.

Posted by: Thomas Jackson at June 12, 2008 11:36 PM


I've learned that if you don't tell lefties right up front which of their little games you won't play, they'll try to squirm out of actually providing a link, thus distracting the conversation.

By laying down the rules that I'll play by right off the bat, their squirming room is greatly diminished, and they usually slink back to DU or DailyKos... as DaveP appears to have.

Same result in the end, since DaveP had no evidence for his assertion... I just shortened the process of making it apparent to everyone.

Posted by: C-C-G at June 13, 2008 09:39 PM