Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Parallels

With the election of Sen. Barack Obama to the Presidency, I want to draw your attention to some parallels that I see between this election, and one that took place 32 years ago.

First, a brief history lesson -

1973 - VP Spiro Agnew resigns, Rep. Gerald R. Ford appointed as VP.

1974 - Nixon resigns over Watergate scandal (the beginning of "gotcha! journalism"), VP Ford sworn in as President; Democrats vote to de-fund military aid to South Viet Nam.

1975 - Saigon falls to North Viet Nam in April.

1976 - a virtual "unknown" peanut farmer turned Governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, wins Democrat nomination promising "change" and "hope", runs against Ford, and wins; next four years sees change - major economic chaos (20+% prime interest rates, double digit unemployment), and an international crisis involving Iran, as they occupy the US Embassy in Teheran, and hold US hostages captive for 444 days. Nation gripped by ennui and angst, believing what Carter has said - that the good old days are gone forever, and everyone must learn to get along with less of everything, and loses "hope".

Fast forward to recent history, up to the present -

2000 - Governor of Texas George W. Bush is elected President, defeating VP Al Gore; Democrats claim he stole the election due to US Supreme Court intervening in Florida vote debacle (which claim was disproved by studies conducted by the liberal media showing Bush won Florida); beginning of "Bush Derangement Syndrome".

2001 - Worst terrorist attack in US history occurs on September 11; Nation comes together in support of GWB - briefly; Dems talk the talk, but don't walk the walk due to "BDS"; US invades Afghanistan, ousts Taliban and helps set up democratic government, which Dems "support".

2003 - US invades Iraq; Bush declares reason for invasion is WMD, although there were other reasons stated as well; liberal media fixates on WMD, and when "none" is found, begins assault on Bush; Democrats first vote in support of war in Iraq, and then attempt to undermine policies of Bush/Cheney, due to "BDS".

2004 - Bush wins second term as President over Sen. John Kerry; liberal media continues with false "Bush lied, people died" meme; Democrats continue efforts at undermining Bush/Cheney domestic and foreign policies; "BDS" reaches epidemic proportions.

2005 - War in Iraq starting to not go so well, due to inadequate planning on the part of Rumsfeld and General Staff; Democrats proclaim war is "quagmire" and "lost", therefore US should abandon Iraq (just like Viet Nam).

2006 - War in Iraq getting worse; Democrats call for abandoning Iraq getting louder; Bush calls for new strategy; liberal media discounts talks of new strategy; virtual "unknown" Senator Barack Obama from Illinois declares for Presidency.

2007 - Due to new strategy - surge in troop levels, and different tactics - war in Iraq begins to dramatically turn around; Democrats still claim war is "lost" (Reid), a "quagmire" (Kennedy), and continue to call for abandoning Iraq (most of the rest of them); liberal media complicit with Democrats in description of how the war is going, continuing their drumbeat of negativity, refusing to report on gains; Obama defeats Hillary Clinton for Democrat nomination, promises to bring "change" and "hope"; Senator John McCain wins Republican nomination; liberal media in tank for Obama, and refuses to even consider looking into negatives about Obama, while conducting a despicable "witch hunt" on McCain's running mate, Governor Sarah Palin.

2008 - Surge in Iraq successful, and more and more areas of Iraq are turned over to complete Iraqi control; Obama defeats McCain, and wins US Presidency; liberal media complicit in getting Obama elected.

Parallels

Carter comes on the scene at the end of an unpopular war (Viet Nam), and takes advantage of electorate disgust with Republicans.

Obama comes on the scene towards the end of another unpopular war (Iraq), and with liberal media complicity, takes advantage of electorate disgust with Republicans

Both proclaim they are the one to bring about "change" and "hope".

Carter brings "change" in the form of economic chaos, and causes America to lose "hope" in his inept handling of the international crisis in Iran, allowing American citizens to be held hostage for 444 days.

After four years of "change" and "hope" under Carter, the US electorate wakes up, and elects Republican Ronald Reagan to the US Presidency. Real change happens almost immediately, as Iran releases the US hostages, and the economy begins to rebound and then boom again, bringing real hope to Americans.

Obama brings about "change" in the form of economic chaos even before he became a state Senator through his representing ACORN in their lawsuit to force banks to loan money to people they knew would never be able to pay the loans back, and then backs the risky economic policies of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac after he becomes a US Senator, enabling (with Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd) the sub-prime mortgage crisis, causing many Americans to lose "hope" of keeping their homes.

What will the next four years under Obama bring America? Probably an abandonment of Iraq before they are ready for us to leave, and possibly an international crisis involving Iran. Definitely higher taxes, which will only exacerbate the economic crisis we are in right now. As he has stated, Obama wants to implement various new government programs which will mandate acceptance and forced compliance by the American people. These programs will take away freedom of choice in many areas, diminishing hope for many Americans. Will the liberal media continue to be complicit, or will they wake up and begin to finally ask the hard questions they should have been asking all along?

After four years of Obama, will the American electorate wake up and take back our government, and elect a Republican who will bring real change and hope to America? Only time will tell what will happen, but my hope is that Obama doesn't do permanent damage to America, and that the American electorate will wake up, and elect someone to change the direction Obama wants to take America.

Will the Republicans be able to stop any of Obama's socialistic plans, or will they continue to fold? Will the Republicans present a candidate to run against Obama that will invigorate the American electorate as Reagan did? I believe that the answer to these last two questions is yes. Yes, the Republicans will be able to stop most, if not all, of the more obvious socialistic programs Obama wants to institute, and yes, the Republicans will present a candidate in 2012 who will invigorate not only Republicans, but Independents and even Democrats, someone who will be a truely charismatic leader, who isn't afraid to stand up to Obama and speak the truth, and who will not be afraid of the liberal media.

Last but not least, who will this person be? Will it be Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin? Will it be Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal? Or will it be a relative unknown, someone new to the national stage? Only time will give us the answer to that, but don't lose hope, for change - real, positive change - is coming.

No comments: