When Sen Ted Kennedy lost the Dem Primary to Jimmy Carter...

United States
November 3, 2008 9:42pm CST
He refused to support Jimmy Carter on principle, because he didn't believe Carter was qualified (and he was proved RIGHT). Now, Hilary Clinton is angry that the Republican Committee is using her words against Obama. People are getting robocalls playing the tape from the primary where she said there is no on the job training, no time for speeches and nice words... "Senator McCain brings a lifetime of experience" and "Sen Obama brings a speech he made in 2002" So she is saying she doesn't approve her words being used against Obama and she fully supports Obama. How do you think people will feel about this later, if Obama is elected and it turns out that he is NOT up to the job after all? Do you think Hillary will be called out on her enthusiastic support of Obama? Was Ted Kennedy correct to stand on principle and not support his party's candidate when he felt he wasn't qualified?
2 responses
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
4 Nov 08
Sadly the democrats have now become the "fall in line" party. Dissenting opinions are not allowed. Bill Clinton was attacked repeatedly, even here on mylot, for endorsing Obama, but not endorsing him ENOUGH. Others on this forum have called for the removal of Lieberman for endorsing McCain. There has been no end of people claiming Hillary supporters have to fall in line to endorse Obama. You'll also noticed that about 99% of the democrats here on mylot think Obama is some sort of godlike figure who can do no wrong. Look at every thread asking people on what issues do they disagree with their candidate. Not ONE democrat has posted on those threads indicating a single issue in which they disagree with Obama. Most of the democrats who do support McCain are doing it quietly for fear of retribution from their own party. Independent thought is no longer allowed under the rule of the democrats.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
6 Nov 08
"They will see we are on the verge of a huge economic crisis and say, "Well, they pulled out of the war because they needed to handle some stuff at home."" Countries like the UK and Australia might see it that way, but countries like Iran, Venezuela, and all the terrorists will see it as the Americans fleeing in defeat. Such a perception will lead them to attempt to bully America. If you don't believe me just look at Russia. The are now positioning missiles aimed at Poland and blaming the US for the war with Georgia. Obama is going to have his hands full with Putin trying to prove to the world that he is weak and incompetent and that the US can't or won't protect its allies. Georgia was just a test. Now they have their sites set on Poland and Ukraine.
• United States
4 Nov 08
Democrats still think independently. However, we aren't going to pick out the things that we think are wrong with Obama's campaign. Personally, I think the things that are wrong with his campagin are better than what McCain is going to do. Plus, republicans seem to pick out the things that are wrong just fine, so why should we? For example, I believe that Obama may try to pull out the troops too quickly. Even though he said that he was going to be "as careful getting out as we were getting in," I don't think he's going to be careful enough. However, getting out of the war is a better idea than staying there for 100 more years! Democrats don't think that everything Obama is planning to do is gold. However, most of what McCain wants to do is dog poop. I would much rather have something that resembles gold than dog poop!
• United States
5 Nov 08
To me, it seems like McCain is being a little kiddish about the whole situation (and so are you). Everyone is saying "If we pull out, we surrender." I say: SO WHAT!!! Al Qaeda may try to say that we are surrendering to their power or what not, but I bet you all the money I have that they won't try and pull the ish they did before! We invaded their country, killed their leader, and took over their government. I don't think they can say anything about Americans being punks! And the rest of the world will see it too. A lot of countries look at what the U.S. is doing abroad and what's going on at home. They will see we are on the verge of a huge economic crisis and say, "Well, they pulled out of the war because they needed to handle some stuff at home."
• United States
4 Nov 08
I don't think people will be disappointed in Obama. Mainly because I think he can do an awesome job; however, most importantly, the President never stands alone. He has congress and advisors that helps him make decisions and think clearly. And of course Hillary would be called out! What else is the media for but replaying all of the bad stuff?!?! And Ted Kennedy should've supported Carter. If he did, maybe Carter could've felt a little more confident and made some better decisions. Plus, Carter did do some things right like how he handled the Hostage Crisis in Iran and how he sat down the leaders of the Isreal and Palestinian nations. If anything, people need to realize that parties should not be split. We saw this several times in our history and when a major party split, the underdog came up and took everything. We have to stick together no matter what!
• United States
4 Nov 08
What, specifically, did Jimmy Carter do during the Iran Hostage Crisis that was helpful or resolved the situation quicker? Were you an adult during that time? (just curious) Jimmy Carter did win the election without the support of Ted Kennedy. Kennedy is a die hard Democrat from a long family history of well known Democrats, so it took quite a bit of courage and strength for him to not support Jimmy Carter, don't you agree?
• United States
4 Nov 08
No, I was not an adult during that time (I wasn't even born really). I think he kept the nation calm about the whole situtation. He didn't try to declare war or anything like that. I say it's comparable to what Reagan did when the space shuttle blew up. He really didn't do anything to help the situation (who could really?), but the way he addressed the nation made everyone feel a little better. And you could either see what Ted did as courage or extreme animosity. The outcome would've been the same either way.
• United States
5 Nov 08
Yes, some people believe Ted Kennedy was just mad and acting like a toddler; others believe it was totally his dedication and concern for the country. However, once Jimmy Carter was in office, Kennedy became quite a leader and supported Carter and people were proud of him as well. Unfortunately, Carter is and was a good man with a good heart, but not a leader. I didn't think you were born then -- you look very young in your picture, and the way you talk about when Carter was President doesn't sound like someone who lived thru it. Actually, he cut defense, like the Democrats now want to do. And when the hostage crisis came, we tried a big time rescue and it FAILED. We were pretty humiliated. It failed because of our poor training and poor planning and poor equipment, as we had not spent money on keeping our military up to par. He did not negotiate with the terrorists, and remained strong on that point, but most people felt he worsened the crisis and lengthened the time before they were finally released. It was a LONG, LONG time. So many of us see Carter in Obama. I pray he is not, but some of his policies sound so familiar and they failed every single time that they were tried in our country and around the world. But maybe he has come up with a "twist" of how to make it work. I hope so... But the gas shortages, bad economy, and severely lacking military are still to this day in my mind. I voted for Carter -- it was the first time I was old enough to vote -- 18. It was the last time I voted for a Democrat, too. It sounds wonderful to say you will do all these things to help people, but the fact is no one has come up with a way to do it. I think McCain had the closest idea, because he wanted to cut out all the waste in government, all the stuff like a screw that would cost you 25 cents in Home Depot will cost the government several hundred or more! Just because companies jack up the price because the government will pay it, because we have such stupid red tape and don't check out prices. McCain has ended some of that, and wanted to end it all as President. That, and not sending so much money overseas, would have given McCain more to "play with" in our budget and it could have helped people a lot.