How are they different?

[Canceled.LTroll.29]

"the similarities between Carter and Obama are considerable"

http://www.observer.com/2008/turning-obama-jimmy-carter

 

[Onceler]

Not really. If you opposed Jimmy Carter, you weren't racist. Opposing Obama is racist. Not voting for Obama 3 times is racist.

 

[Cypress]

Cons are seriously out of touch, non-hip, and OLD if they think this carter shit is going to work.

Nobody under the age of 55 even remembers Carter, or gives a shit about carter's "policies".

 

[Epicurus]

Cypress thinks he's so hip.

Yeah kids are raging for bureaucracy and regulatory commissions.

 

[uscitizen]

McSame is like carter in that he is going to beaten badly.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.29]

I read somewhere that Carter won.

 

[Cancel3]

I read somewhere that Carter won.

He won the first time. But the second time he was beaten like a red-headed stepchild.

I think that is what they were referring to.

 

[NOVA]

Not really. If you opposed Jimmy Carter, you weren't racist. Opposing Obama is racist. Not voting for Obama 3 times is racist.

Opposing Obama is racist. ?
Opposing Obama is racist. ??
Opposing Obama is racist. ???

One has to be " seriously out of touch " to suggest such nonsense...

 

[Canceled.LTroll.29]

I'm still waiting to hear how they differ.

 

[Minister of Truth]

They don't, except Obama is not from the South, so he is at least automatically better in that...

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Illinois was a border state.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Illinois was a border state.

No, Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were border states because they had slavery.

 

[Damocles]

No, Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were border states because they had slavery.

Portions of Illinois also had slavery.

http://www.freedomtrails2legacies.org/slavery.htm

Later it turned into the "Black Code" which was indentured service with all the whipping...

 

[Canceled.LTroll.29]

Wasn't slavery a Democrat institution?

 

[Good Luck]

Cons are seriously out of touch, non-hip, and OLD if they think this carter shit is going to work.

Nobody under the age of 55 even remembers Carter, or gives a shit about carter's "policies".

Did you read the article? It is not critical of Obama at all. The comparison is not between Carter's policies and Obama's. It is a comparison between the election of 76 and today, comparing Carter's primary tactics to Obama's, and a warning that McCain's campaign could hammer at Obama's lack of experience in the same way that Ford's campaign hammered at Carter's lack of experience.

As for giving a shit about Carter's policies now, there are those who do for the same reason you are concerned about Bush's policies when it is McCain that is running. Some of Obama's proposals do bear a similarity to some polcies of Carter. It is a legitimate comparison, and considering how many of Carter's policeis failed, it is also a legitimate concern.

Of course, if all you are worried about is the election of 2008, go ahhead and not worry about the resemblance of Obama's policies on taxation, trade, and international relations to those of Carter. If you want the democratic party comeback to last a short 6 years, opening the way for another 12-16 year run by the republican party, go ahead and disparage anyone who has the historical knowledge to make the comparison to a president only we old farts remember.

But if you want the democrats to win and STAY in power for a while, you better concern yourself with what they plan for us.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

If only the Democratic party would finally wise up and run Zell Miller, then they'd really be carving a path to the future.