If you have "no place to go," come here!

Robama vs. Obomney watch: Jimmy Carter says it's a wash

USA Today:

Former President Jimmy Carter believes Barack Obama will win a second term, but says he'd be "comfortable" with Mitt Romney in the White House because of the Republican's past history as a "moderate."

Of course, by "moderate" we mean "neo-liberal crypto-fascist in hock to the banks and insane with blood lust," but never mind that. Sigh. Remember Nixon, anyone?

Hunter Thompson:

At the stroke of midnight in Washington, a drooling red-eyed beast with the legs of a man and a head of a giant hyena crawls out of its bedroom window in the South Wing of the White House and leaps fifty feet down to the lawn...pauses briefly to strangle the Chow watchdog, then races off into the darkness...towards the Watergate, snarling with lust, loping through the alleys behind Pennsylvania Avenue, and trying desperately to remember which one of those fore hundred identical balconies is the one outside of Martha Mitchell's apartment....Ah...Nightmares, nightmares. But I was only kidding. The President of the United States would never act that weird. At least not during football season.

Nixon, of course, was a liberal by today's standards. Nixon also -- by comparison with the two amiable psychopaths now running for Preznit -- was a moral giant. Nixon, after all, wanted to be caught; that's why he kept the famous tapes, instead of destroying them. Can you imagine Robama or Obomney feeling guilty over anything?

No votes yet


goldberry's picture
Submitted by goldberry on

Obama's in big trouble when Jimmy abandons him and this is pretty damn close. It doesn't scream "vote of confidence" to me.

Submitted by lambert on

Unfortunately, there are times when I have to cite to Tweededum as opposed to Tweedledee, simply to avoid confusing readers on sourcing.

tom allen's picture
Submitted by tom allen on

Jimmy Carter -- anti-abortion, pro-My Lai Massacre, anti-liberal (Ted Kennedy) -- that dude? But what a surprise he likes a conservative, and an even further conservative.

Carter's done a lot of good stuff. But he's still way conservative.

Roman Berry's picture
Submitted by Roman Berry on

I have no idea where you came up with the material in your post, but I find it ridiculous. Carter is spot on here. The actual difference between Romney and Obama is vanishingly small, rhetoric notwithstanding.

Obama lies to Democrats to try to get their votes. Romney lies to Republicans to get their votes. Two liars. One corporate/oligarchical party. The Money Party.

Carter was a conservative Democrat by the standards of 1976. By today's standards, he's a screaming liberal. Of course by today's standards, Nixon was also a screaming liberal. (The thing you have to remember about Nixon is that under current law, everything he did in office was legal. Nixon would face impeachment in the current era. He'd simply cite "national security" and that would be that.)

As far as who Obama really is, see this excerpt from Thomas Frank's "Pity the Billionaire" in which he quotes Barack Obama from "The Audacity of Hope":

“Increasingly I found myself spending time with people of means – lawfirm partners and investment bankers, hedge fund managers and venture capitalists,” reminisced the future president in his 2006 book, The Audacity of Hope.

“As a rule, they were smart, interesting people, knowledgeable about public policy, liberal* in their politics, expecting nothing more than a hearing of their opinions in exchange for their checks. But they reflected, almost uniformly, the perspectives of their class: the top 1 percent or so of the income scale that can afford to write a $2,000 check to a political candidate. … They had no patience with protectionism, found unions troublesome, and were not particularly sympathetic to those whose lives were upended by the movements of global capital.”

“I know that as a consequence of my fundraising I became more like the wealthy donors I met,” Obama confesses a few paragraphs later. So he has. And so has his party. Today’s Democrats have their eyes on people who believe, per Obama’s description, “in the free market” almost as piously as do Tea Partiers.

Class language, on the other hand, feels strange to the new Dems; off limits. Instead, the party’s guiding geniuses like to think of their organization as the vanguard of enlightened professionalism and the shrine of purest globaloney.

*Liberal in their politics? People who despise unions, don't have sympathy (much less any help to offer) for " those whose lives were upended by the movements of global capital" are liberal? Yeah. Right.