Posts Tagged ‘Ronald Reagan’
Students of political history already know the story of the late Senator Ted Kennedy in 1979. Others like Mo’Kelly are old enough to simply remember it. For everyone else, it goes a little something like this. Democratic party discontent with President Jimmy Carter for all things ranging from the American gas crisis to the Iran hostages; reached its nadir when Senator Ted Kennedy decided to mount a Democratic challenge against the sitting president.
Proponents of the idea argued that the party needed a “stronger” candidate in the general election, regardless of the Republican competition. Opponents argued it would rip the party apart and send moderates and independents into the ballot box to vote Republican.
Ted Kennedy entering the fray splintered the Democratic party pure and simple and presented the public face that the party had lost all faith in its own president. It led to disastrous consequences.
Jimmy Carter held off Kennedy and then was summarily thrashed in the general election, losing to Ronald Reagan in one of the largest landslides in election history. Independents and moderates swung heavily for Reagan and Democratic turnout was comparatively low.
The term “Reagan Democrats” was given to the tangible and palpable disaffected and ultimately defected Democratic voters.
The political lesson supposedly learned on that day was the in-party dissension fractured the base and all-but-ensured a Republican victory.
In 2011, Republicans have been working night and day to make the historical connection between President Obama and President Carter; the cerebral, intelligent yet ineffective Democratic president of the 20th century. And just like the spineless Democrats they tend to be, they have been eating it up with extra helpings, rushing to repeat history and the same mistakes.
Is President Obama in trouble…absolutely. Does his party have legitimate reason to voice a level of discontent in regards to how we’ve arrived at this point in history…surely. But repeating the “Ted Kennedy” mistakes of 1979 only ensures that either Rick Perry or Mitt Romney easily waltzes into the Oval Office in a landslide manner.
What do I mean? Rumors are growing daily that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (and others) are preparing to mount a Democratic primary challenge to the president. It would be fiasco 1980 all over again. The primary rejection of Ted Kennedy had largely to do with memories of Chappaquiddick still dancing in voters’ heads and a reluctance to continue the Kennedy political monarchy. More importantly, it sent the message to America that the Democrats had lost all faith in the sitting president.
To suggest that there is a Democrat more “electable” than the sitting president of the United States is foolhardy on its best day, irrespective of party. You will always have a better chance of keeping the White House outright through re-election, than trading politicians from the same party. If the president is not supported by his own party, Americans take notice. If Democrats put forth the idea that they need a new candidate, you can bet America will follow suit. In relation to Hillary Clinton, to surmise that independents and moderates will opt for a cabinet member of the very administration in which they by implication are rejecting is even more silly.
Al Gore lost in his 2000 bid to become president in large part due to a rejection of the idea of a Clinton continuation in the wake of Monica Lewinsky. If you thought it was hard to elect Barack Obama, how hard do you think it would be to elect Hillary Clinton on the heels of Barack Obama?
You can’t criticize the foreign policy of the administration regarding Libya and in turn offer up the Secretary of State as a presidential alternative. That’s simply silly. Democrats are going to have to ride the Obama train until the wheels fall off. But having the wheels fall off is distinctly different from unscrewing the lug nuts and pulling them off yourself.
Offering up Democratic primary challengers is self-sabotage of the worst order.
If Democrats wish to bite off their nose to spite their face and send a message to President Obama…feel free, knock yourself out. Just know that you will only be validating the comparisons to Jimmy Carter and ensuring that history accordingly follows the Carter narrative, complete with a landslide defeat.
If Democrats are unhappy with President Obama, just wait for “President Perry.”
Despite the Republican talking points, 2012 is for the Democrats to lose. Let’s not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with an ill-conceived primary strategy and repeat Carter history.
The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published at The Huffington Post and EURWEB.com. For the most recent posts of Mr. Mo’Kelly, visit http://mrmokelly.com. Mr. Mo’Kelly can be reached at email@example.com.
Free Subscription to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE
Follow The Mo’Kelly Report on Facebook HERE
Twitter – @mrmokelly
Music and movie icon Barbra Streisand sits with CNN’s Larry King and expresses her disappointment in President Obama’s presidency thus far. She makes fair points and Mo’Kelly agrees. The real issue is whether African-Americans will continue to support him at greater than 92% come 2012. He’s done a lot specifically for other groups and communities, but there is a question whether “We” will turn out in as great of numbers walk in lock-step with the Democrats as in 2008.
The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published at The Huffington Post and www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. For more Mo’Kelly, http://mrmokelly.com. Mr. Mo’Kelly can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Free Subscription to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE
Follow The Mo’Kelly Report on Facebook Network Blogs HERE.
There’s “funny” and there’s “FUNNY.” Ben Quayle, the son of former Vice President Dan Quayle recently declared that President Obama is the “worst president in history.” That means the worst of all 234 years of American history, the worst of all 44 Commanders-in-Chief.
In fact, let’s say that again and out loud for comedic sake. The son of the agreed upon WORST Vice President in history is going on record as to the supposed “worst” president in American history.
It’s the gift that keeps on giving. The more you say it, the funnier it gets.
As Ben is presently running for Congress in Arizona and is all of 33 years of age, clearly he is using hyperbolic statements in order to garner press, notoriety and ultimately voter visibility. It “should” be transparent to even the somewhat informed.
The danger with hyperbolic statements lies when the intellectually astute call the orator on to the carpet or hold it up to the light for closer inspection.
Ben Quayle at 33 years of age reasonably can only remember the administrations dating back to George H.W. Bush…at best.
AT BEST. (Maybe Ronald Reagan…MAYBE).
His firsthand “authoritative” knowledge on the subject is flimsy AT BEST. Clearly then, his pejoratives are supported by his study/knowledge of Oval Office history, right?
Let’s go there.
To allege that President Obama (in two years) is the worst Commander-in-Chief of all 44 is to argue the following:
President Obama is then allegedly “worse” than Richard Nixon, whose connection to the Watergate scandal resulted in resignation in infamy. Mo’Kelly happens to believe that being the ONLY president to ever resign and its connection to orchestrating a conspiracy to obstruct justice in the investigation of multiple felonies…guarantees a spot on the short list of worst presidents in history. In fact, that should get you the pole position in this race to the bottom.
George W. Bush – an unnecessary Iraq war under false pretenses and creating the economic climate (including Iraq expenditure) which led to the Great Recession. Remember him? Ben, you should…his daddy and your Daddy used to work together. You probably hung out at the White House on occasion and played finger paints together. Yes, “Dubya” is 31 years older than you Ben, but that’s neither here nor there. There’s a childlike quality which has followed “Dubya” for life. We should agree, when we say “George W. Bush”…the words ”finger paints” can’t be far behind.
It is also widely-accepted that the inertia better known as the James Buchanan administration allowed the extension of slavery and the rise of the confederacy. Translation, he paved the way for the Civil War. Mo’Kelly happens to believe that any president who leads this country into its ONLY Civil War probably is far, far worse than anything which can be attributed to President Obama. See also Franklin Pierce and Millard Fillmore and their “paved the way” Civil War contributions.
But nobody ever said hyperbole and the Tea Party ever relied on facts.
Let’s keep digging…Mo’Kelly brought his shovel.
William Harrison anyone? Remember him? You probably don’t and it’s
understandable why. He was president for a grand total of 32 days. He contracted pneumonia from his exceptionally long inauguration party as the story goes. Harrison ended up as the first president to die in office. Yes, got sick at his inauguration and died a month later. Stellar presidential legacy Mo’Kelly must say…
President Obama…worst ever?
In our attempts to really tie this up with a big red bow, we can’t forget the presidential contributions of Herbert Hoover, credited with walking the country into the Great Depression. (see George W. Bush and the Great Recession above). Mo’Kelly should also note that Hoover lowered taxes and refused going the route of financial relief (i.e. bailing out Wall Street and Main Street). Pay attention Tea Party supporters. Lowered taxes and refused to grant financial relief. History is clear on how that strategy turned out.
That is only a short list of “worst presidents.” How President Obama is even mentioned in such company inside of two years is beyond laughable. One does not have to agree with his policy decisions to know that classless (and easily refutable) statements by an unknown congressional aspirant are only for the purpose of stoking the Tea Party fires. Going further, such tactics are draped in political naïveté and in flagrant disregard of American history.
If you the reader have opened just ONE history book in your lifetime or are over the age of 35 (the age requirement to BECOME president), you the reader then have enough ammunition to laugh Ben Quayle off the stage.
Hmm, the guy who isn’t even old enough to become president and hasn’t even held congressional office is weighing in on the “worst president ever.” There’s a reason why there’s an age requirement and there’s also a reason why parents invented “eating at the kids’ table.”
Yes, never let facts and common sense get in the way of a good Republican rant.
If this is the type of Congressional leadership his potential Arizona constituency desires, then Lord help them all.
Then again, this is the same Arizona which fought to block the King holiday and gave us SB1070. Its hostility towards people of color and the backwards mentality of those supporting such drivel are also well-documented. Maybe Quayle is just “playing to his base.”
Doubt it. Remember, he is the son of Dan Quayle.
Ben Quayle, Mo’Kelly has met Barack Obama. He is an honorable man and politician. Ben Quayle, you’re no Barack Obama.
Ben Quayle, the son of arguably the biggest laughingstock in the history of politics and spelling bees has lashed out at President Obama in the hopes of gaining notoriety, press and Tea Party-esque adoration.
(“Arguably” because Sarah Palin deserves due consideration. Let’s give credit where credit is due. Mo’Kelly will listen to any and all Sarah Palin arguments for laughingstock supremacy.)
In terms of “notoriety,” mission accomplished and Ben Quayle will be treated accordingly going forward. Add this to your press clippings.
“M-o-’-K-e-l-l-y” is how it is spelled…no extra “e” please. This is 2010, spell check has been invented.