[gondramB]

tcostell: But the thing I remember most about those years was the personal differences between Reagan and Carter.

rhombus: Indeed yes. And should we not recall the contrast between Clinton and Bush as well?


Yes, but... The Democrats weren't tired of Clinton in the way they were fed up with Carter.

[rhombus]

Yes, but... The Democrats weren't tired of Clinton in the way they were fed up with Carter.

Which makes what Bush had to do even harder.

[tcostell]

I've maintained for a long time that for the Democrats, Clinton was the exception. He was a man of such strong personal charm that he was able to sell the same old tired class warfare and socialism package of the left to the Democrats one last time. Then he maintained his popularity by creating a false wealth through tax code changes. Then because he had little to no principles, whatever worked well he took credit for, and whatever failed he blamed other for.

But with him gone now, all we have left is the Democratic party of Jimmy Carter.

Universal appeasement

The peace of unilateral surrender instead of conflict which leads to victory.

Deeply held shame of America and all that it stands for.

Socialism, socialism, socialism.

The weakening of America's strategic position in international diplomacy.

It goes on and on. Howard Dean isn't the next Clinton... he's the next Carter. John Kerry isn't even the last Carter. Murtha IS the last Carter, but without the education. Pelosi, Boxer, Edwards.... they lack any real vision so they go with what they know, These are CARTER's DEMOCRATS.

[weegee]

But Carter is more prominent in political circles than ever before.

They don't seem so "tired" of him now. They have Bubba and the Peanut for living ex-presidents. By comparison, they'll stand next to Jimmah, the nucular scientist.