Remember back to the first term of Barack Hussein Obama and maybe into his second term before we actually began to suspect he was intentionally performing poorly? We compared him to that previous Worst-U.S.-President-Ever, Jimmy Carter, and we were naively certain no one who came after Obama could possibly be as bad.
This from frontpagemag.com.
Fast forward to today, and Obama is again masquerading as President of the United States, “albeit jointly with Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett.” That subversive triumvirate is behind the curtain pulling the strings of decrepit puppet Joe Biden—or whoever his body-double is—whose wrecking-ball impact on the nation is making Americans eager for the return of Donald Trump.
But in her new book, The Biden Malaise: How America Bounces Back From Joe Biden’s Dismal Repeat of the Jimmy Carter Years, award-winning journalist Kimberley Strassel demonstrates that, although Biden is worse, the parallels between his and Carter’s presidencies are striking—and worth examining closely, because it is precisely by applying the lessons of how Ronald Reagan ended the disastrous Carter era that we can wrench ourselves free from our current morass under [the Obiden Regime].
A member of the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, with “a weekly must-read column” called Potomac Watch, Ms. Strassel is also the author of the bestsellers Resistance (At All Costs) and The Intimidation Game. She has been called a razor-sharp observer of the political arena who brings an “insightful historical perspective to her commentary.” Seriously, though, her new book completely ignores the war currently being waged, the fact that Biden is a puppet, and that Trump is the legitimate Commander in Chief. But I digress.
Her new book is a must-read for understanding how and why the two Presidents [one democrat of old and one an illegitimate communist/globalist] have overseen similar domestic and foreign policy debacles, and for understanding what that means for America going forward.
How are Biden and Carter similar as occupiers of the Oval Office? Ms. Strassel counts the ways.
She wrote:
The peanut farmer from Georgia in 1977 took the reins of a nation already beset by the Great Inflation, sky-high crime, and declining U.S. oil production, [and he made all of it worse].
Forty-four years later, the Obiden Regime is an eerie echo of its ‘70s predecessor:
From how they came to office, to their hot messes of inflation, energy, and crime, to their foreign policy travails, to their public unpopularity.
Both men, despite promising healing and moderation before taking office:
[G]overned in a far more liberal fashion than their divided electorates expected—and became lightning rods themselves. They both had the unfortunate knack for creating or exacerbating the types of messes that most infuriate average Americans. [Biden intentionally, Carter by ineptitude.]
Moreover, the:
Carter and Biden years were similarly shaped by foreign policy fiascoes, the consequence of shared and naive notions of sanctions, multilateralism and appeasement. Both men weakened America on the world stage and invited aggression… [Both also sabotaged America’s energy security and oversaw] oddly similar social upheaval, with public angst over race conscious governance, gay rights, education, court decisions, and rising crime.
Generally speaking, both Biden and Carter:
[R]eflexively turned to government as the answer to every problem, demagoguing the private sector and larding it down with new regulations that stifled economic growth.
Strassel elaborates comprehensively on these similarities and more, ultimately concluding that the comparison is “unfair—to Carter,” who at least arguably had the excuse of being too inexperienced for the domestic and foreign crises that engulfed his administration. Biden has no such excuse, and yet has doubled down on Carter’s ineptitude, for the obvious reason: The Regime does not have a plan to improve anything because its plan is to destroy everything.
The Biden Malaise isn’t simply an issue-by-issue comparison about the havoc wrought by the two Leftist Regimes—each staffed by a gaggle of incompetent misfits.
In the final chapters of the book— “Morning in America,” “Bouncing Back,” and “It Takes a Reagan”—Ms. Strassel shifts gears to point us toward a renewal of American exceptionalism, including walking conservative voters through a checklist of what they should look for in the candidate who can lift us out of the Biden malaise and make America great again. [S]he asserts that the question that must guide voters through the turbulent election rapids ahead is, ‘Does the GOP have a new Reagan?’
For Strassel, the candidate who can save us is not Donald Trump. While acknowledging the ways in which Trump was a bold and effective leader—his refusal to bow to progressive media pressure, for example—Strassel explains that this time around, Americans must jettison the polarizing baggage Trump unavoidably brings.
Having met him, she wrote, she is confident:
[H]e has an abiding belief in America and in American exceptionalism. The problem is that Trump has an even ‘huger’ and more abiding belief in Trump and in Trump exceptionalism. And that always takes precedence. [Some Republicans no doubt feel they owe a debt to Trump, she concludes.] The question is whether the debt is worth another four years of pandemonium.
Strassel neglects to mention that the “pandemonium” was largely—if not entirely—caused by the combined efforts of the mass propaganda media, the Deep State, the communist/globalist crime syndicate, and foreign entities to destroy Trump and to bring America to her knees. Again, I digress.
Noting that Ronald Reagan’s formula for obliterating Jimmy Carter in 1980 in one of the biggest landslide victories in the history of presidential elections—no mention of Trump’s 2020 legitimate landslide win—was simply to run as the anti-Carter, Strassel reminds us that Trump didn’t come up with the MAGA slogan. It was Reagan’s 1980 campaign that coined, “Let’s Make America Great Again.”
The Great Communicator’s:
[G]reatest contrast [with Carter] was his tone—his unrelenting optimism in the future of the country. He had over the years ditched the pessimism that haunted conservative intellectual thought, its perpetual, hand-wringing belief that it was already too late. [Reagan’s genius, she adds, was that it is] totally possible to be both tough and principled—yet to also be inviting.
Strassel wrote:
Like Carter in 1980, Biden has created the conditions for a lasting shift among the electorate.
Democrats are becoming the party of wealthy, coastal elites enamored with European style welfare policies. This is providing Republicans the opportunity to form a broad and wide coalition of multiracial, working-, and middle-class Americans.
But, she warns, the GOP risks throwing it all away:
Too many Republicans are abandoning sound principles, chasing populist sentiment, hoping to buy voters with Democrat-lite promises.
[…]
If Republicans want to take full advantage of today’s economic and political situation—if they want to step toward another Reagan era—they’re going to have to embrace an overhaul. The movement needs to recommit itself to a principled, conservative agenda. It needs to become again the party of ideas, optimism, and outreach.
Final thoughts: Although listed as a Republican, Strassel is not a member of Trump’s MAGA—comparing Trump to Reagan in such a way as to demean Trump obviously excludes her as a Trump follower. She speaks positively about the future of the United States but she seems to think the country can be pulled out of this “malaise” without the leadership of President Trump. Who then?
Strassel cannot see the forest directly in front of her because of all the damn trees. She is caught up in pretending this is mere politics as usual—another four-year election—seemingly unaware of the long-term globalists efforts to destroy America and institute a One World Government. There may have been a Deep State working against Carter, but its existence wasn’t obvious and Strassel has failed to mention the team of enemies opposing Trump ever since he first declared himself a candidate.
The words directly above are my most favorable opinion of Strassel. At the other end of the spectrum: I have her pegged as a blind, lying jackass, either being intentionally deceptive or grossly naive, but either way she is not to be trusted.
The one aspect I do agree with Strassel on is her statement that Trump “has an abiding belief in America and in American exceptionalism.” She should have stopped right there, but one line is not a book and it will not sell.
