For 30 years now, Republicans have gotten a lot of mileage from beating up on Jimmy Carer for the bad economy of the 1970's. They hope to lead people to the conclusion "If you elect another Democrat, he'll ruin the economy just like Carter did!"

The economic vitality of the Clinton years devastates this beloved GOP spin. They attempt to spin this by claiming that the rip-roaring economy of the 90's was a mirage, merely a figment of the Dotcom bubble that eventually burst. This is easily refuted by the fact that the DOW Index more than tripled under Clinton, with similar runups in the S&P 500 and the Wilshire 5000. Dotcom stocks were either OTC or on the NASDAQ, not the NYSE, home to the previous indexes. So economic growth was not merely a matter of Dotcom excess.

Spinners are also fond of giving full credit for the economy of the 90's to Ronald Reagan. Even Clinton couldn't screw it up, the bluff continues. Well, if a President can benefit from the policies of a predecessor, is it not also possible for one to suffer from the policies of a predecessor? Then is it not possible that the bad economy of during the Carter years was a holdover from the Nixon/Ford years?

A solid case can be made for just this conclusion. People who have been dumping on Carter for 30 decades now forget the inane "WIN" buttons of Gerald Ford (as if inflation can be fought by wearing a button!), the existence of which demonstrates that inflation was a pre-existing problem. They also forget the wage-price controls of Richard Nixon. {And when they warn, "We don't want to go back to the Bad Old days of Jimmy Carter-- Gas Lines!" they also forget that the worst gas lines were in 1974 following the Egypt-Israel War and the OPEC Oil Embargo. Carter didn't take over until 1977.}

I've challenged Carter bashers to specify exactly what Carter did that allegedly "ruined' the economy. No one can give me an answer. They get flummoxed, as if I had challenged the most self-evident notion that needs no defense. After all, that Carter ruined the economy is what they've been hearing all their lives. So what did he do wrong? Was it reducing the Nixon/Ford deficits? Was it deregulation? hardly.

Here's what Carter did: Through Fed Chief PaulVolcker, used strict measures to squeeze the inflation out. And this deepened the existing recession, helping elect Reagan, who benefitted from Carter's policies when the policies enacted earlier started to get result only during his term. Ironically, Reagan's much-vaunted record owes much to a predecessor, a traditionally despised one who deserves better.

So by the same logic, 911 blame can rightly be placed on Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton because his weakening of the military and shows of weakness after the embassy attacks in Africa and pulling out of Somalia led to Osama's being emboldened to attack.

__________________
Not many people know this, but I'm really famous!

No, by the logic of this post, GHW Bush would be responsible for the attacks of 9/11.

Reagan did not precede Clinton, George Bush did.

Reagan is credited (wrongly) with the Clinton economic Boom.

Reagan, Bush, Clinton--Reagan caused the economic boom on Clinton's watch.

GHW Bush, Clinton, Bush--GHW Bush (not Clinton) should be blamed for the attacks of 9/11.

carter was a disaster so people should just stop defending him all you do is harm your own image here.

So he shouldn't defend Carter... because it's not cool?

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Precisely. Why discuss politics at a political forum?

See this is the kind of response that irriates the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of me, you want to blame someone for the 9/11 attacks blame Al Queda - bin laden/Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the hijackers they are the ones who planned and carried out the attacks not GWB

__________________
For real coverage of the Iraq war see
http://michaelyon-online.com/

Conan! What is best in life?
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women

Did they look like psychos? Is that what they looked like? They were vampires. Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a **** how crazy they are!

no b/c there is no reason to defend carter his administration was horrible and before anyone attacks me for defending bush there is no comparions plus bush got re-elected my friends.

name one thing carter did right?

neither are clinton, reagan, or carter. i'm not a fan of two of those guys but al qaeda is to blame.

He tried to maintain a balanced budget.
He did all the actual work involved in getting the Iran hostages released.

He was president at a bad time. It would be quite difficult for any president to come out of that looking good. It doesn't help that Democrats still bought into the idea that a 70% upper income tax bracket was a good idea...
He also gets bonus points for being one of the few actual decent human beings to get into the office in modern times, even for all he loses by presiding over hard times and being the tail end of some of the accepted Democratic notions of the time.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside