The Rehabilitation Of Jimmy Carter

Many people regard Jimmy Carter as the worst president in living memory, if not all time. Personally, I give that distinction to Lyndon Johnson, but considering that the Obama presidency has taken on the appearance of Jimmy Carter's on fast forward, it's not surprising that Democrats are trying to rewrite history.

More than a few observers have pointed out that President Obama and the Democrats in Congress seem determined to repeat the errors of the 1970s by returning to inflationary spending, tax increases, auto company bailouts and cuts to the defense budget while coddling dictators who hate America.

So it was inevitable that this recycling effort would get around to attempting the most brazen rehabilitation of all: Jimmy Carter was a visionary president! If only we had listened to him.

It was 30 years ago this month that Mr. Carter reached the nadir of his presidency with his famous "malaise" speech in which he criticized the American people for their materialism and "crisis of confidence." To be fair, Mr. Carter never used the word malaise in his speech (an aide used "malaise" in characterizing the speech to the media the next day), but the label stuck because it so accurately conveyed the substance of his message. Having run for president in 1976 on a slogan of giving us "a government as good as the people," Mr. Carter essentially was saying the people were no good.

Today the malaise speech is being revived as a totem of Mr. Carter's unrecognized greatness and profundity.

At least this isn't as bad as the New York Times' attempt to rehabilitate Adolf Hitler's reputation.

David Duke Was A Community Organizer

Democrats have taken to pointing out that Jesus Christ was a community organizer, while Pontius Pilate was a governor. Well if they want to play like that, here are a few other community organizers.


There was David Duke,





















And Robert Byrd,

















Both of whom organized this community.



















And who can forget this community organizer?

The Seattle Times Defends Hitler

While most Democrats went ballistic over George Bush's presumed criticism of Barack Obama, the Seattle Times went one better, and defended Adolph Hitler.

What Hitler was demanding at Munich was not unreasonable as a national claim (though he was making it in a last-minute, unreasonable way.) Germany's claim was that the areas of Europe that spoke German and thought of themselves as German be under German authority. In September 1938 the principal remaining area was the Sudetenland.

So the British and French let him have it.

In a way, I'm okay with this. If the Seattle Times wants to join George Bush and me in equating Barack Obama with Neville Chamberlain, I welcome them to the club.

Update: Seattle Times caught airbrushing.