(A Leader for a) Change: Obama Recycles Carter 1976

Watching the much praised victory speech given by Sen. Obama, I had a sense of déjà vu. I had heard all his key points before, in very similar circumstances. In particular, the word Change which was splashed across the screen in bright, starkly contrasted red and white and which fell from the candidates lips with almost every breath brought to mind the most famous change presidential candidacy of the later half of the 20th century, that of Jimmy Carter.

In the wake of Watergate and Nixon’s resignation and pardon by Gerald Ford, after the quagmire of Vietnam and the illegal incursions into Cambodia and Laos, in the midst of the Middle East oil crisis and economic hardship exacerbated by inflation, with the nation in the grip of gridlock and political turmoil, everyone was ready for a Change. That was why a peanut farmer from Georgia with no national experience was able to promise that he would restore honesty and good old fashioned American values to the federal government and be A Leader for a Change .

Here is a link to Jimmy Carter’s Democratic Convention Nomination Acceptance Speech 1976

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter's_First_Presidential_Nomination_Acceptance_Speech

Here is a link to the transcript of Obama’s much praised speech from last night:

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-usobam0105-transcript,0,7073760.story?coll=ny_home_rail_headlines

Now, before I even start, I am not accusing anyone of plagiarism. The current political situation exactly mirrors that of 1976 for a very good reason. Dick Cheney has made a conscious effort to reclaim the executive powers that he believes were stolen from Richard Nixon, and as a result we have a great big fat lying Article II mad-with-power executive branch that no one trusts. It is inevitable that at least one of those seeking to take over the office of the presidency would use the Jimmy Carter 1976 Strategy, since it worked so well for the peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia. Promise a clean start, impeccable honesty, unity, an end to wars, a fair shake for all the people, transparency in government---and keep reminding the voters that you are a fresh face.. Indeed, the most likely winning strategy in a political situation such as the one we find ourselves in this year is the Jimmy Carter 1976 Strategy. Bravo to Sen. Obama and his team for figuring this out.

Here is Obama’s speech with the comparison sections chosen from Carter’s Democratic nomination speech for their thematic similarities inserted (in italics).



Years ago, as a farm boy sitting outdoors with my family on the ground in the middle of the night, gathered close around a battery radio connected to the automobile battery and listening to the Democratic conventions in far-off cities, I was a long way from the selection process.



It’s a pleasure to be here with all you Democrats and to see that our Bicentennial celebration and our Bicentennial convention has been one of decorum and order without any fights or free-for-alls. Among Democrats that can only happen once every two hundred years. With this kind of a united Democratic Party, we are ready, and eager, to take on the Republicans—whichever Republican Party they decide to send against us in November.



There is a new mood in America. We have been shaken by a tragic war abroad and by scandals and broken promises at home. Our people are searching for new voices and new ideas and new leaders.



We need a Democratic President and a Congress to work in harmony for a change, with mutual respect for a change. And next year we are going to have that new leadership. You can depend on it!



As I’ve said many times before, we can have an American President who does not govern with negativism and fear of the future, but with vigor and vision and aggressive leadership—a President who’s not isolated from the people, but who feels your pain and shares your dreams and takes his strength and his wisdom and his courage from you.
I see an America on the move again, united, a diverse and vital and tolerant nation, entering our third century with pride and confidence, an America that lives up to the majesty of our Constitution and the simple decency of our people.



It is time for us to take a new look at our own government, to strip away the secrecy, to expose the unwarranted pressure of lobbyists, to eliminate waste, to release our civil servants from bureaucratic chaos, to provide tough management, and always to remember that in any town or city the mayor, the governor, and the President represent exactly the same constituents.



It is time for a nationwide comprehensive health program for all our people.



It is time for a complete overhaul of our income tax system. I still tell you: It is a disgrace to the human race. All my life I have heard promises about tax reform, but it never quite happens. With your help, we are finally going to make it happen. And you can depend on it.



Business, labor, agriculture, education, science, and government should not struggle in isolation from one another but should be able to strive toward mutual goals and shared opportunities.



But peace is not the mere absence of war. Peace is action to stamp out international terrorism. Peace is the unceasing effort to preserve human rights.
Peace is a combined demonstration of strength and good will. We will pray for peace and we will work for peace, until we have removed from all nations for all time the threat of nuclear destruction.
America’s birth opened a new chapter in mankind’s history. Ours was the first nation to dedicate itself clearly to basic moral and philosophical principles: that all people are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that the power of government is derived from the consent of the governed.
This national commitment was a singular act of wisdom and courage, and it brought the best and the bravest from other nations to our shores. It was a revolutionary development that captured the imagination of mankind. It created a basis for a unique role of America—that of a pioneer in shaping more decent and just relations among people and among societies.




Nineteen seventy-six will not be a year of politics as usual. It can be a year of inspiration and hope, and it will be a year of concern, of quiet and sober reassessment of our nation’s character and purpose. It has already been a year when voters have confounded the experts. And I guarantee you that it will be the year when we give the government of this country back to the people of this country.



It is time for the people to run the government, and not the other way around.




Although government has its limits and cannot solve all our problems, we Americans reject the view that we must be reconciled to failures and mediocrity, or to an inferior quality of life. For I believe that we can come through this time of trouble stronger than ever. Like troops who have been in combat, we have been tempered in the fire; we have been disciplined, and we have been educated.
Guided by lasting and simple moral values, we have emerged idealists without illusions, realists who still know the old dreams of justice and liberty, of country and of community.



My vision of this nation and its future has been deepened and matured during the nineteen months that I have campaigned among you for President. I have never had more faith in America than I do today. We have an America that, in Bob Dylan’s phrase, is busy being born, not busy dying.



This year we have had thirty state primaries--more than ever before—making it possible to take our campaign directly to the people of America: to homes and shopping centers, to factory shift lines and colleges, to beauty parlors and barbershops, to farmers’ markets and union halls.

This has been a long and personal campaign—a humbling experience, reminding us that ultimate political influence rests not with the power brokers but with the people. This has been a time of tough debate on the important issues facing our country. This kind of debate is part of our tradition, and as Democrats we are heirs to a great tradition.



It is the time to honor and strengthen our families and our neighborhoods and our diverse cultures and customs.



Our country has lived through a time of torment. It is now a time for healing. We want to have faith again. We want to be proud again. We just want the truth again.

The benefits of a the Jimmy Carter 1976 strategy (besides the fact that he won against an incumbent) include automatic teflon armor as long as the candidate is quick to acknowledge any dirt that his political opponents dig up and throw his way. Since he promises a new, more open, more inclusive and humane America, his followers are ready to accept his faults, too (within reason). Carter lusted after women in his heart? No problem. That proves that he is truthful. Obama experimented with drugs as a teenager? Didn't all young men of his generation?

What will sink an Obama Recycling Carter primary candidacy faster than the Titanic? A money corruption scandal. Or any lie about anything. In the general election, they will paint him as weak on foreign policy (fingers crossed that Huckabee is the nominee in which case Gravel could win the general election.)

Even though Obama is doing Carter, be probably doesn't want Carter's endorsement. That would be too old school for someone trying to be the Change candidate.

:dem:

I'm sure you could do a similar thing for almost any political speech. They're all very similar. Even parts of Huckabee's sounded like Obama's.

Still, I'll give you credit for putting in the effort.

and, Obama is no Jimmy Carter ... nor, in this political climate would he want to be. I believe he is more politically savvy than Carter - Carter did not try to be politically savvy and, in the end, it undermined his ability to achieve what he wanted to.

And, while I also believe, Carter was probably the honest, caring, committed, intelligent, hard-working, politician I ever witnessed/worked for, because of the way things 'work' in Washington/politics, it got him and the country virtually nowhere. The establishment is firmly entrenched and I don't think anyone, no matter how savvy or well-intentioned, will ever actually be able to 'change' anything, really, without an all out non-violent revolution/awakening of the citizenry.

Currently, there are a bunch of folks who have been brainwashed into believing that rich folks and corporations deserve hand-outs, but hard-working folk don't deserve a fair wage. How f'd up is that?

And, behind the scenes, you have politicians, on both sides of the aisle, who either won't/can't/don't think they can/or don't see it as advantageous to their political ambitions to fight for the Constitution and 98% of the American citizenry.

It will take more than one person to truly 'change' anything.

Thanks for running back in time and doing all the leg work, to lay out the similarities.

"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose."

The only thing is, the situation is sooo much more dire. Darth Cheney, to whatever extent he's been animated by the spirit of Nixon's ghost, and all the rest of them...

What they've done! It's just the tip of the iceberg, the denouement isn't close to getting here, yet.

http://www.tucc.org/about.htm


They are committed to CHANGE..but what kind? see for yourself!

What do you think the SM and RW will do with info...? I'm sure thay are FIRED UP AND READY TO GO!!!


:think:

Is that your point?

When Huckleberry says the voters are seeking change when they vote for him...he's stealing from Carter?

Any politician who has ever used the word "change" after 1976 is stealing from Carter?

And no politician before 1976 used the word "change" when campaigning?

Get real.

He's anti-gay rights (same ol' same ol')
His Health INSURANCE plan for America benefits the Corporate Insurance interests more than we the people (same ol' same ol')
He has no intention of quickly withdrawing our troops and ending the war (same ol' same ol')
He has no intention to do away with NAFTA or exit WTO (same ol' same ol')

Apparently for many, their idea of "Change" does not necessarily have to include "for the better". For me personally however, it does...I could never support this candidate.

Not change, fundamentally, but change superficially. That is all they need in America.

or is that just something someone is saying? As I haven't been paying alot of attention to him I don't know but that is something that is very important to me. If he is anti-gay rights then I will not be able to support him should he be the candidate in November.

Don't bet on Barack

LGBT voters may want to think twice about throwing their support behind 2008's great blue hope.
By the Reverend Irene Monroe
An Advocate.com exclusive posted November 21, 2006

Barack Obama, the lanky and charismatic U.S. senator from Illinois, is a national, if not global, phenomenon. He is being touted as the miracle elixir for a nation divided along the fault lines of race, religion, and class.

And also a nation divided along the battle lines of Red State versus Blue State.

Obama delivered a visionary keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, when he stated, “There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America. There’s the United States of America. There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America. There’s the United States of America…. We worship an awesome God in the blue states, and we don’t like federal agents poking around our libraries in the red states. We coach Little League in the blue states and have gay friends in the red states,” made him America's great hope for a better future.

As a supposedly bipartisan politician who understands and reconciles opposing views, and a non-doctrinal Christian whose personal identity and life journey shaped his lens to include those on the margins, why then, I ask, is this presidential hopeful not united with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer voters on the issue of marriage equality?

“I was reminded that it is my obligation not only as an elected official in a pluralistic society, but also as a Christian, to remain open to the possibility that my unwillingness to support gay marriage is misguided,” Obama wrote in his recent memoir, The Audacity of Hope.

But Obama’s audacity is not only his unwillingness to support the issue, but also his misunderstanding and misuse of the term “gay marriage.” The terminology “gay marriage” not only stigmatizes and stymies our efforts for marriage equality, but it also suggests that LGBT people’s marriages are or would be wholly different from those of heterosexuals, thus altering its landscape, if not annihilating the institution of marriage entirely.

But Obama’s remarks in a recent interview with Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press spoke somewhat encouragingly about granting LGBTQ couples not marriage equality but certainly civil union rights.

However, having lived outside of America during its turbulent decades of the Jim Crow era and legal segregation, Obama may not know on a visceral and lived experienced level what those decades had been like for African-Americans.

But he ought to know, as a civil rights attorney, that granting LGBTQ Americans only the right to civil unions violates our full constitutional right as well as reinstitutionalizes the 1896 U.S. Supreme Court decision Plessy v. Ferguson. As a result of that decision, the “separate but equal” doctrine became the rule of law until it was struck down in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.

However, Obama doesn’t understand that regardless of one’s gender expression or sexual orientation, we want equal status to be institutionalized within our marriages as well.

Although not a cradle Christian, Christianity became Obama’s newfound religious identity late in his life. And his affinity to conservative Christian beliefs not only informs his decision on the issue of marriage equality, but it also solidifies his decision about us in a community of believers like himself.

“I must admit that I may have been inflected with society’s prejudices and predilections and attribute them to God, ” Obama writes in his book. “My work with pastors and lay people deepened my resolve to lead a public life. ... I had no community or shared traditions in which to ground my most deeply held beliefs. The Christians with whom I worked recognized themselves in me; they saw that I knew their Book and shared their values and sang their songs.”

Religion has become a peculiar institution in the theater of American politics. Although its Latin root, religio, means to bind, it has served as a legitimate power in binding people's shared hatred in both red states and blue states, both intentionally and unintentionally.

Obama’s The Audacity of Hope is not a must-read for LGBT voters because he fails to fully comprehend or sincerely commit to the issue of social justice for all Americans. He does not tackle head-on how the religious rhetoric of this political era has played an audacious role in discrimination against LGBT people, leaving us with little to no hope, his rhetoric included.

“In years hence, I may be seen as someone who was on the wrong side of history. I don’t believe such doubts make me a bad Christian, ” Obama writes.

As LGBT voters, our job is neither to judge nor vote for Obama on whether he is a good Christian. It is, however, for us to judge and vote on whether he is a good statesman.

If he should run for president, he wouldn’t get my vote.

But time will tell.

fucking change, again. And recycling is big..we should all be doing it..helps our Planet.

However, recycling old campaigns, slogans and empty promises that produced bad presidents is not something that needs done again.

Oh, and I am not bashing Carter- I loved Carter. He was just not a good or strong president. He helped usher in the Reagan era. I don't want a repeat of that.

that's freakin' hogwash.

Carter was a visionary who saw how much of a problem our addiction to foreign oil was when nobody else would listen. Now it's 30 years later and we're just starting to talk about making the changes that Jimmy Carter wanted to make in 1979. The only thing standing between his re-election as well as sparing us 8 years of that senile fucker Reagan was that the hostage rescue mission wasn't a success. Carter had absolutely no control over that.

Here's wikipedia, talking about Dewey's '48 campaign against Truman:

He spoke in platitudes, trying to transcend politics. Speech after speech was filled with empty statements of the obvious, such as the famous quote: "You know that your future is still ahead of you." An editorial in the Louisville Courier-Journal summed it up:

"No presidential candidate in the future will be so inept that four of his major speeches can be boiled down to these historic four sentences: Agriculture is important. Our rivers are full of fish. You cannot have freedom without liberty. Our future lies ahead."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Dewey