Does Obama = Jimmy Carter?

In a stroke of irony I have a post on my blog which considers whether Obama = Jimmy Carter.  Read the full story there .

So why is this ironic?  Because I personally have been arguing here that Obama = George W. Bush .  :)

I can only assume that being compared to Jimmy Carter will be considered good news by the lefties since Carter is a leftist icon.  Personally I wouldn't see that as being any kind of an improvement for his re-election chances.

 

 

Submitted by GoRight on Thu, 2011-04-28 22:30
-->
Tags:

Comments :

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

No malaise tonight

We just took out Osama Bin Laden, and crowds have turned out at the White House and Ground Zero chanting USA! USA! 

We've been through some tough times, sure, but we've turned the corner in this country after a lost decade.  We have some problems still, sure, but some of our problems are beginning to be addressed. 

 

skymutt: accept no substitutes!

by: skymutt - 2011-05-01 23:49 …………

Well this is good news ...

assuming that sufficient information is eventually released to convince people that this really was Bin Laden.  Obama isn't to be taken at face value on this topic, or any topic for that matter, as he it known to be dishonest when it comes to his political expediencies.

The accounts of this event are already lining up to feed the fears and paranoia of the conspiracy theorists and the remaining terrorists due to Obama's mishandling of the information flow and key decisions surrounding this event.  Some aspects of this whole episode that are likely to cast doubt in the minds of these groups are:

  • Bin Laden was alleged to have been shot in the face, likely making photographic evidence of the body to be unrecognizable.
  • Bin Laden's body has reportedly been dumped at sea, thus preventing independent examination of it to verify it's true identity.
  • Obama is reportedly considering not releasing any details regarding the above information to the public.

I will give Obama credit for actually playing golf the day this all went down , and for having been "in office" when Bin Laden was allegedly killed.  He also gets recognition for going as far out of the way as he has to try and make it look like he played a key role in the whole thing.

The reality is that the key piece of information needed to ultimately bring Bin Laden down, the name of an Al Queada courier that he trusted, actually came to us courtesy of the Bush Administration.  Without that name we'd still be on square one. 

What is clear is that Obama has been simply following the Bush era plan for executing the war on terror.  I am not aware of any substantive change that Obama has implemented in that regard.  He is simply continuing the Bush policies as has been pointed out elsewhere .  So kudos to Obama for having the foresight to continue what Bush began with our pursuit of Bin Laden, rather than following in the footsteps of Bill Clinton's "hands-off policy with respect to Bin Laden" .

But it is with some additional irony that Skymutt chose this diary to post this comment about Bin Laden to because in this instance once again we not only see that Obama = George W. Bush with respect to pursuing Osama bin Laden in the first place but we very nearly also had Obama = Jimmy Carter in this event as well:

Getting Osama bin Laden: How the mission went down

The helicopter carrying Navy SEALs malfunctioned as it approached Osama bin Laden’s compound at about 3:30 p.m. ET Sunday, stalling as it hovered. The pilot set it down gently inside the walls, then couldn’t get it going again.

It was a heart-stopping moment for President Barack Obama, who had been monitoring the raid in the White House Situation Room, surrounded by members of his war cabinet.

“Obviously, everyone was thinking about Black Hawk Down and Desert One ,” a senior administration official recalled.

US helicoptor failures resulting in burning hulks left behind seem to be a hallmark of Democrat Presidents in these types of covert operations.

Obama will go down in history as the invisible President because he is will be best known for failing to stand out in any way with respect to his predecessors, except perhaps for being the first Black President but even on that score isn't it really just a case of Obama = Bill Clinton ?  :)

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 15:35 ………… parent •

As I said ...

WASHINGTON (AP) — Officials say CIA interrogators in secret overseas prisons developed the first strands of information that ultimately led to the killing of Osama bin Laden.

...

Bush and his policies elicited the first clues to tracking down Bin Laden.  Obama was merely following the threads discovered under Bush to their inevitable conclusion:

Bin Laden's death rekindles 'enhanced' interrogation debate

...

In the end, U.S. officials say, it took years of patient intelligence work -- including information gleaned from multiple detainees and other sources of intelligence -- to enable the CIA to figure out who the courier was.

“Four years ago, we uncovered his identify,” said a senior U.S. official. Two years later, the U.S. officials were able to trace the courier and his brother to the area in Pakistan where they finally found bin Laden.

And who was running the show 4 years ago?

Still, I can agree with the President and his Administration on the following:

Phone call led US to bin Laden’s doorstep, capping a hunt that began in a secret CIA prison

...

“I think the accomplishment that very brave personnel from the United States government were able to realize yesterday is a defining moment in the war against al-Qaida, the war on terrorism, by decapitating the head of the snake known as al-Qaida,” Brennan said.

Said the president: “I think we can all agree this is a good day for America.”

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 16:10 ………… parent •

Okay, he played a round of golf in the morning...

...and then it looks like he spent the rest of the day and evening on this mission.  So, he clears his head with a little R & R before a very important event that might require some high stakes decision making under time pressure-- sounds prudent to me. 

I will give Obama credit for actually playing golf the day this all went down, and for having been "in office" when Bin Laden was allegedly killed.

The events in your own linked article demonstrate that he was engaged in the details of this raid from the planning stages.  Clearly, the most credit goes to those who actually put their lives on the line, but come on!  How can you blame Democrats for mechanical failures of aircraft during raids, yet give them no credit when the overall mission succeeds? 

He also gets recognition for going as far out of the way as he has to try and make it look like he played a key role in the whole thing.

I was on RedState today and a couple poor sports over there were saying this also.  Do you really want to be like the negative nelly RedState mopes?

If it makes you mad that Obama seems to get some satisfaction from his accomplishments, get used to it, because it looks like  you'll be watching that over and over for six more years.

US helicoptor failures resulting in burning hulks left behind seem to be a hallmark of Democrat Presidents in these types of covert operations.

Noted that when America has a major victory during a Democratic administration, your primary focus is on finding the failure in the midst of victory. 

Or, even worse, you pretend that the event might not have even happened-- in this case, by claiming that we have not seen the evidence of bin Laden's death. 

The accounts of this event are already lining up to feed the fears and paranoia of the conspiracy theorists

Good.  Gives em something to keep em occupied. 

skymutt: accept no substitutes!

by: skymutt - 2011-05-02 17:11 ………… parent •

Like shooting fish in a barrel ... :)

The events in your own linked article demonstrate that he was engaged in the details of this raid from the planning stages.

He attended the meetings.  Out of respect for his position they claim he ran them.  In reality he was merely being briefed on what the real decision makers were saying.

I will admit that the final decision was his and he seems to have actually made a good one in this case.  But remember, blind squirrels find acorns too!  :)

Clearly, the most credit goes to those who actually put their lives on the line, but come on!

Come on, Skymutt.  You know how to read through my partisan rhetoric by now: just pretend you are reading something written by the Democrat leadership when discussing a Republican.

:)

How can you blame Democrats for mechanical failures of aircraft during raids, yet give them no credit when the overall mission succeeds?

This one is TOO easy.  Their historical stances on military funding which ultimately affects preventative maintenance, of course!  He he.  :)

(Come on.  That's actually a good come back.)

Noted that when America has a major victory during a Democratic administration, your primary focus is on finding the failure in the midst of victory. 

Nah, just predicting what others are going to do.  Judging from the articles I dug up after the fact I pegged it pretty well.

I threw Obama a bone up above.  I think that we can agree that regardless of how large or how small Obama's individual role was in this event that we are glad he did what he did.  I think that we can also agree that this is a major victory for the US.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 17:33 ………… parent •

Heh, this was worth digging up ...

Noted that when America has a major victory during a Democratic administration, your primary focus is on finding the failure in the midst of victory. 

You mean sort of like this was?

Senator Reid On Iraq: "This War Is Lost"

"I believe myself that the secretary of state, secretary of defense and — you have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows — (know) this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday," said Reid.

:)

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 18:25 ………… parent •

Democrats are not perfect.

and Reid is one of the least perfect Dems ;-)  (Senate leader is one of the most thankless jobs on the planet-- that's whay you often get a rather unremarkable Senator in the position).

However, while I agree that Reid's choice of words was ill-considered, I can understand his extreme pessimism and disgust.  Up to and through 2006, Bush had utterly and completely botched the Iraq War.  As violence escalated early in the surge in 2007, it would have been easy to see that escalation in violence as just another failure, given Bush's track record.  If Bush was competent, Dems would never have said stuff like this.  It took over four years of gross mismanagement and failure to get Reid to this point. 

So it really comes down to what you think the greater ill is-- a Democratic Senator choosing his words poorly, or a commander in chief screwing the pooch for four years in conducting a war that never should have been started in the first place.

skymutt: accept no substitutes!

by: skymutt - 2011-05-02 18:54 ………… parent •

More agreement!!!

Democrats are not perfect. and Reid is one of the least perfect Dems ;-) (Senate leader is one of the most thankless jobs on the planet-- that's whay you often get a rather unremarkable Senator in the position).

I fully agree with this comment.

Now, while I don't mind your asking the obvious question "Who'z more worzer?" let us at least not shift contexts at the same time.  I think if you go back and check that you will find that this sub thread began with your criticism of me, personally, and I responded with an (admitted not perfect) analogy comparing my statements to those of one Senator Harry Reid.

So a more appropriately framed version of your question would have been:

So it really comes down to what you think the greater ill is -- an anonymous partisan political blogger posting obvious political rhetoric on a little read blog on the intertubes or the leading Democratic Senator choosing his words poorly and/or being oblivious to the fact that his words were basically telling the troops who were in theatre at the time that (a) they had already lost, and (b) they weren't even accomplishing anything?

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 20:18 ………… parent •

I do not disagree.

He attended the meetings.  Out of respect for his position they claim he ran them.  In reality he was merely being briefed on what the real decision makers were saying.

I will admit that the final decision was his and he seems to have actually made a good one in this case.

I do not disagree, but it's just the nature of the position that the legwork gets delegated, experts will come in and run the briefings, and the president is tasked with listening, gaining an understanding, and basically making one decision.  There's still a lot of pressure involved, and one bad decision can blow up in your face when you are the President.  Also, you have to give extra credit for taking the "action" course and getting it right, because in a case like this, Obama could have chose the safer course of doing nothing, which would have been the wrong decsion in retrospect, but the public would not have known that he had passed on an opportunity.

As for the rest, it looks like you are trying your best to throw a bone here... a very small bone, like one of the bones in the inner ear, but a bone nonetheless, so I will accept the bone on Obama's behalf :-)   Indeed this is a major victory for the U.S.A. and like I said before, the bulk of the credit should go to the folks who put themselves in harm's way.  I think we can agree on that too.

skymutt: accept no substitutes!

by: skymutt - 2011-05-02 18:39 ………… parent •

Indeed ...

There's still a lot of pressure involved, and one bad decision can blow up in your face when you are the President.  Also, you have to give extra credit for taking the "action" course and getting it right, because in a case like this, Obama could have chose the safer course of doing nothing, which would have been the wrong decsion in retrospect, but the public would not have known that he had passed on an opportunity.

And this is clearly an example of where Obama is acting more like George W. Bush than like Bill Clinton as the following historic quote illustrates :

When I take action, I'm not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 tent and hit a Camel in the butt.  It's going to be decisive.

-- George W. Bush, Oval Office, September 13, 2001

Bush was, of course, referring to Clinton's Wag the Dog moment .

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 19:49 ………… parent •

Lurkers ...

FYI, Skymutt, I think we actually have a couple lurkers following our conversations here.  When I post diaries which are mostly just a link to my blog posts I can see how many people got there from here.  I've been getting 5-6 hits for each from here.  So unless you have been clicking that link multiple times we have a couple of other people following along.

Maybe it is web crawlers but I doubt it.

Come on, lurkers, join the fun!  :)

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 17:43 ………… parent •

Heh

I would have clicked through to the birth certificate one a few times to look at the images.  The other ones i would have clicked thru at least once but likely not more than twice. 

I'll shift all your blogs over to the front page, maybe that will reel in the lurkers...

skymutt: accept no substitutes!

by: skymutt - 2011-05-02 18:06 ………… parent •

And let the conspiracy theories begin ...

Skeptics wonder: Where's proof bin Laden's dead?

At this point, the world has little more than the word of the American government that Osama bin Laden was killed in a daring raid on Sunday.

For some, that's not enough.

One American sent an email to CBS News complaining that "There is not a shred of evidence that Bin Laden has been killed and, of course, the media are not requiring any."

Asked the emailer: "Is it un-patriotic or un-American to ask how, specifically, we know that he's dead?"

Conspiracy theories, meanwhile, are already popping online. Asks the site Uncoverage: "After 10 years of searching for Al Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden, why would President Obama announce that the terror-master has been killed in a firefight with American special forces, announce that we have the body, and then DUMP THE BODY IN THE OCEAN two hours later, before anyone can see the body and verify it?"

 

Bin Laden's backers are also raising questions. On the Shomouk al-Islam forum, a gathering place for al Qaeda supporters, one vowed vengeance in the wake of the attack and wrote, "we are your soldiers Osama...Whether you are dead or alive."

Gee, it's almost like I'm psychic!  :)

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 17:14 ………… parent •

Conspiracy theorists and terrorsts....

who gives a rats ass what they think?  They doubt everything no matter what you show them-- this has been proven.  I'm sure if it gets out of hand, they will show the photos or whatever they need to do. 

You don't have to be a psychic to predict that the idiots will be out in full force after an event like this.

 

skymutt: accept no substitutes!

by: skymutt - 2011-05-02 17:24 ………… parent •

More perspetives on Obama = Jimmy Carter ...

only worse!  :)

Sunday Reflection: When Jimmy Carter Is your best-case scenario, you're in trouble

By: Glenn Harlan Reynolds 04/30/11 8:05 PM

People on the right have been comparing President Obama with Jimmy Carter for a while now: The rise from nowhere via inexplicable press adulation, the smarmy moralizing, the excessive faith in his own abilities, the tendency of everything he touches to turn to crap -- all seem eerily reminiscent of the Carter presidency.

But now it's people on the left who are saying the same thing. Trouble is, at this point a Carter rerun is probably a best-case scenario.

...

I thought that the rest was a pretty decent read, although one of Reynolds points is obviously shot down by recent events:

Meanwhile, on foreign policy -- another Carter weak point -- Obama also looks worse. Carter blew it with Iran, encouraging the Iranian armed forces to stay in their barracks, while Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's radical Islamists (whom Carter thought of as "reformers") took power, and then approved the ill-conceived hostage rescue mission that ended with ignominious failure in the desert. Obama, by contrast, could only wish for such success.

While he came close to ending up like Carter given the failure of one of the helicopters, Obama did manage to eak out a successful mission thanks to the Navy Seals he sent in.  :)

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-05-02 21:43 …………

I know I'm a lone voice in the wilderness here, but

imho, the United States had absolutely no business taking matters into its own hands and going in and killing Osama Bin Laden. First of all, how can anybody be positive that we went in and nailed the right guy?

Secondly, look what our involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, not to mention tons of other countries, cost in terms of compromised and/or lost lives of innocent civilians, not to mention our own GI's.

Thirdly, whether or not we got the right guy, Osama Bin Laden, if he was still alive beforehand, should've been tried, either in the Hague or in a Muslim court, and the decisions regarding what to do with him made from there.

Fourth: No matter how evil and horrible Osama Bin Laden was, the fact that so many people went out, partied and celebrated over his death was rather ghoulish...and disgusting.

Having said all of the above, Obama is worse than Jimmy Carter, and he doesn't give a rat's a** about the people. Obama's just looking to get re-elected, which he probably will, because most of American people, whoever they may be, are naive or willfully ignorant.

by: independentminded - 2011-07-27 10:52 …………

Heh.

Well I won't agree that we shouldn't have been going after Osama bin Laden but I do agree with most of the rest of your points.  There are plenty of mis-steps in the manner in which Obama purportedly went after him that night.  I say purportedly because even now we have no proof that ANYONE was actually killed, much less Osama bin Laden.  Where's the proof?  All we have is a bunch of conflicting claims from Obama and his merry band of circus clowns.

Sure Al Qaeda claims we got him but why wouldn't they?  If they say we did then we'll stop looking and he could breath a lot easier, no?

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but I hear lots of claims and see absolutely no proof whatsoever.  Show me the body.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-07-27 12:17 ………… parent •

To each their own, GoRight, but

I stand by my position that the United States had no business whatsoever In Iraq, Afghanistan, or any of the other places that we've been in for so long, nor did we have any business going in after Al Qaeda and costing the lives of hundreds or thousands, if not millions of people, including innocent civilians and our own soldiers.  It was the height of stupidity and irresponsibility, with a total disregard for human lives.  Sorry, but i can't countenance that, especially because the United States has been at this stuff for far too long--more than half a century!

I also stand by my position that Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda should've been tried in the Hague or in a Muslim court, and allowed whichever court tried Bin Laden to make their decisions.  It's not for the United States to take matters into their own hands and wrecklessly go into another country to ostensibly kill one terrorist and endanger and take the lives of our own soldiers, not to mentions untold numbers of innocent civiians, and destablizing sovereign countries.

 

by: independentminded - 2011-07-27 15:33 ………… parent •

Oh, I agree with you on this bit ...

I also stand by my position that Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda should've been tried in the Hague or in a Muslim court, and allowed whichever court tried Bin Laden to make their decisions.

I just disagree that we should not have gone after him.  I agree that we should not have violated the ban on assassinating political leaders, which Osama bin Laden was.  Obama should be tried for violations of the Geneva conventions as well.  If torturing people is bad, killing unarmed people in cold blood is arguably worse, no?

If you believe that Obama actually had Osama killed, then that's where you're at according to the most credible accounts of how things went down.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2011-07-27 18:20 ………… parent •

Well...

If you believe that Obama actually had Osama killed, then that's where you're at according to the most credible accounts of how things went down

Some people are claiming that Osama Bin Laden has been dead for at least ten years, due to kidney failure, or whatever, which makes me question whether or not we even went in and got the right guy. Imho, whether we got the right guy or not, I still feel we had no business going in there, even if it is true that Obama actually had Osama Bin Laden killed. Frankly, I think that politicians, such as the Bushes, Cheney, and Obama should be tried for the violations of the Geneva Conventions, and I agree that torturing people and killing unarmed, innocent people in cold blood, be it overt or covert, are equally bad.

by: independentminded - 2011-07-27 21:31 ………… parent •