Were it not for the probable Supreme Court appointments I'd be inclined to agree that Obama would be unable to do much damage.

But knowing the delicate balance of the current court and the leanings of any judge appointed by a President Obama and approved by his Democrat congress, I must conclude he will do lasting damage that remains well beyond an Obama administration.

The big problem with an Obama Presidency would be that we still have Pelosi and Company in Congress. We need someone in the White House to get in the way of those people, not egg them on to do MORE crazy/stupid things.

While McCain isn't my first choice either, he's at least stubborn enough to shut down and veto some of the more lunatic things that they'll throw at him.

My major concern is what it would do to all the rabod BDS folks out there. The amount of energy they might have to expend to defend/spin their messiah could bankrupt our economy and further decompensate their mental health, putting a major strain on our already inadequate mental health system...

I think the very energetic and supportive MSM treatment they are giving Obama will hurt him in the long run. What most people like more then anything, is a fair fight. So, the MSM, in its arrogant way, will actually help McCain.

Secondly, the commenter above said it best, the Supreme Court is in balance now.

This is way to early to give it to Obama, but I hope the MSM keeps treating him like he has already won. ww

Amen to Opinionated Vogon and WildWillie. Supreme Court nominations will have impacts far beyond a presidential administration.

Jay:

You have arrived at th same place that I was several months ago, with a few minor exceptions.
1. A think that the odds for Senator Obama are quite a bit higher, because the Democrats will be able to get out the vote - finally, because the Republican brand has sunk so badly with average voters, and because Senator McCain is such a terrible candidate.
2. Obama isn't that good, and the Washington Establishment is so thoroughly practiced and dug-in that there is no hope for real change.
3. Obama will blow it and cause a great deal of damage. A lot of stupid ideas will finally go on the dung heap of history where they belong. Libertarian and conservative ideas work; Liberal and Socialist ideas don't. It's that simple. There area few states controlled by Republicans for a long time (NH used to be). The people there enjoy a good quality of life. There are a few more states controlled by Democrats for a long time: they're terrible - almost Hell-holes. MA, for example, with all of it's resources, has an economy that is consistently worse that the national average and has been shrinking in population for a long time.

I agree with several of the comments above that bad Federal court nominations will be one way that Obama will undermine the nation's future, but I have no faith that McCain will do any better, particularly given his past record on Constitutional law and his willingness to compromise.

And look on the bright side. The MSM will be thoroughly in the tank for Obama. These ideas and the people that lie to advance their agenda need to be exposed for the frauds they are.

This sounds like Sen. Clinton's "We'll be fine" speech. :-( Have we given up and no one's told me?

Granted, I'm not happy about either of our mainstream presidential choices either ...

Well, I'm 71 and while I didn't think Bill Clinton could do too much damage, I am really worried about this one. The cult-type mentality is what scares me. I have a son who is rabidly leftist, and he sees absolutely no wrong with George Soros, moveon.org or anything said in spiteful hate against the Repulicans. He is a very loving son to his parents but his politics scare me. I think they will turn around and bite him in his future. And the rest of the USA will get the same bite. I am not concerned for myself, but I think the future of our country is taking a very wrong turn.

Ooops. Someone is poking fun at the usual Obama narrative. Some won't see any humor in it. I think it's hilarious.

Hear, hear, Jay!!

I look at it this way: both of my sons will still be in single digits by the end of an Obama administration, and if there's a second term, my older boy will be far more interested in girls and cars than politics by the time that's over.

Point is, I totally agree. Obama ain't the antichrist, nor is he the messiah. The Republic won't fall because of a lousy president (and who knows, maybe Obama will rise to the occasion, should he win) because we've had more than enough turkeys to do that already.

Heck, if CONGRESS can't sink the country, one solitary president won't either.

And if Obama wins, I will NOT assume an Obama Derrangement Syndrome, like the nuts who hate Bush. Obama will be my president.

I'm glad you're optimistic because I respect your opinion.

I remember the 70's -- and aside from great cinema and alot of free love, it was an awful decade. And in the 70's, we reaped what we now sow with a hostile possibly nuclear Iran and a licentious culture which has partially destroyed the family.

It could get much worse. A nuclear Iran. A Big Govt. nanny state...if Great Britain can rot from within, so can the United States.

But, I hope you are right, not I.

I think Obama could be much worse. A nuclear Iran, and an ignorant youth who seems to think the Soviet Union was just another type of govt. rather - with

If Obama wins, we will have to deal with it. Thankfully, the Supreme Court justices that are within earshot of death or retirement are all left leaning, so Obama can't do a lot of damage replacing left with left. It would be really bad if something happened to one of the right leaning justices. Pelosi and Reid are an immense problem. An Obama presidency, especially with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate would let Obama-Pelosi-Reid etal run their socialist agenda roughshod over the American people. While I feel that Obama is dangerous, it is Pelosi and Reid that can create more problems. I am less worried about Obama, than I am them. The economy, and fuel prices, might be enough to bring them down. If we had congress back, I don't think Obama could do much damage.

I am on my 11th President and in my 70 plus years the last seven have been the most prosperous and safe.
I predict that this period will be shown historically have been the best of times, the likes of not to be seen again by any person living today.
Sure the Eisenhauer years were great also, but I remember spending time in a trench when Soviet bombers overflew the Airbase I was stationed on.

Did anyone see Brian Williams on CNBC this morning, pimping for Achmadinejad or whatever his name is?

Yes, we as a nation survived Jimmy Carter's 4 years. But not all of us did.

If not for Carter, Khomeini would never have taken over Iran, and we would not be stuck now, 30 years later, with a potentially nuclear-armed mullahcracy. We would not have Iran as a sponsor of Hamas and Hezbollah. Those marines killed in Beirut would have come home alive instead.

If not for Carter, the Soviets would not have invaded Afghanistan, setting off the chain of events that ended with the Taliban in power, Al Qaeda in residence, and the Twin Towers in rubble.

And if Carter had not defanged our military and gutted our intelligence services, we would have been more prepared for the hostile world that was not following the example of our unilateral pacifism.

When the worst President in this century was finally booted out by fed-up Americans, the damage he had done would not be known for years or even decades. He was thought of largely as a joke. But it was major damage indeed.

And then, simply because he had been President, he walked the globe for 30 years as some kind of malevolent ghost, helping to seed the entire planet with petty dictatorships and vast human suffering. He legitimizes corrupt sham elections, supports murderous tyrants, spews hate against the Jews, and constantly denounces the country that rejected him as its failed leader.

So, yes, we survived. But I can't get all optimistic about the prospects of an Obama Presidency, especially with a Democratic Congress. The damage could be far more disastrous this time around.

Let me put it another way: look at how our enemies are salivating at the thought of an Obama victory. That should spell it out clearly.

By " catastrophic harm to our nation" I assume you mean of the kind that has occurred in the past 8 years?

By any measure it would be hard for anyone to top the catastrophes of these past 8 years. Perhaps Obama will. Of course no one knows except the 22% or so who think the current resident of the WH is doing "a fine job."

Wow! I missed it. What catastrophic harm did GW cause? I remember the towers being taken down by terrorists that Clinton could have stopped, except for that, my life has been fine. I feel safer as a matter of fact. JFO, are the helicopters circling you again? Are you off your meds again? ww

80% of the country off their meds WW? That's a good one.

There is a difference between "do you think the economy is bad" and "do you know the economy is bad". JFO, you are just a lefty cheerleader that wishes our country would do poorly. Don't you see how pathetic that is? Actually, I feel quite sorry for you and anyone who lives in anticipation of someone or something bad happening. ww

I think I speak for everyone when I say that we look forward to more of your substance-less whining.

I'm sure that the complete lack of criticism you gave this administration will be starkly contrasted by your screeching, harpy-like disdain for everything Obama stands for. From what I've seen, it's going to be great. (Awesome how you tried to connect Bush to being an energy conservationist yesterday - let the re-writing begin!)

it's depressing to think that a glittering jewel with absolutely NO experience whatsoever can come this close to the presidency. It's a pretty sad day in America that someone as incompetent as Obama can be nominated by one of the major political parties in this country.

If we can recover from carter, we can revocer from obama, i agree. But do we really want to try it? Do we really enjoy punishing ourselves that bad? This country deserves far better than Obama (and McCain). Clinton at least came across as presidential at times, where Obama doesn't. Not in the least. The idiotic comments he makes about 57 states, breathalyzers, honoring the dead, some of which are in the crowd today, when the bomb was dropped on Pearl Harbor etc, etc. This guy is a damned moron. Bush is a moron to the left, but they can't see the moron in the guy they just nominated to be their candidate. It's really quite pathetic and sad that this kind of tripe is what is the norm in the Democrat party.

And yes, i said tripe.

For those who think the all electric car is the answer to our energy problems, I would like to offer based on some experience with the science involved that:
1: for a car capable of highway speeds with a capacity of 4 adults and their luggage driven 150 mile per week will require 3 to 5 times the energy of your 5 ton AC unit.
2: To recharge in a reasonable amount of time, say 2 hours will require a charger the size of your present garage and reject enough heat to form a small heat Island overwhelming the Ac units in the immediate neighborhood.
3: Storage of this much energy in an auto mobile will require several hundred, maybe several thousand volts in the car with you.
These are a few of the challenges to an effective plug in automobile. Someday they may be overcome but the technology to do so will not exist for several more Generations.
Additionally Electrical generation and distribution systems would require digging up and replacing all electrical conductors and transformers in your neighborhood.

Korla Pundit:

I'm curious to know what you believe the scenario would have been in Iran "if not for Carter"? Do you think the monarchy would still be in power or there would have been a peaceful transition to democracy without the Islamists taking power? What do you think that Ford could have done to prevent the inevitable?

There's no telling what Obama could do or intends to try and do with the country, but I'd say a majority Democrat Congress, Senate and a Democrat President pretty much spells it out.

Rance, the fact that something was mentioned does not denote an invitation to redirect the thread. Nice try though. Ask Koala Pundit to kindly reply via email if you are so inclined to start a completely different discussion,...

... or start a blog and invite us all.

"80% of the country off their meds WW?" No JFO, just the percentage you're part of.

Rance, how about Carter not letting the Islamofacists demonstrate for more then a year that our country was weak and scared. The mind set was proven a few times since. Should we have demonstrated our strength at that time, a whole different mind set might have been formed. I do not know why lefty's don't get that. Strength is power, weakness is exploited. ww

But kindly include me out from the hysterical mobs who are convinced that Obama is the antiChrist, the bringer of the apocalypse, the worst human being imaginable to be entrusted with the Oval Office.

Amen to that. The less we act like Daily Kos Kooks, Code Pink, etc., the better.

WildWillie:

You didn't address the question and further, you're talking about what happened after the monarchy toppled and the Islamofacists took over.

My questions were "What do you believe the scenario would have been in Iran?"
and "Do you think the monarchy would still be in power or there would have been a peaceful transition to democracy without the Islamists taking power?"

As for your points, the ouster of the monarchy was in motion for a long time. I witnessed protests against the Shah and Savac (the secret police) in the U.S. in the early 70's. The movement against the monarchy dated back many years before the Carter administration. One year into Carter's term, the revolutionaries were powerful enough to openly demonstrate in the street. The Shah left the country about a year later.

Give me scenarios: What could the Carter administration have done, in those two years to prevent the overthrow of the Shah by a powerful grassroots movement?

Monarchy, schmonarchy. I am not interested in maintaining monarchies. But allowing islamists to take over a country is not a good idea for anybody. Why not bring in your beloved United Nations, etc, and get the people of Iran set up with a proper democracy? I think they were just western-exposed enough to take to it quickly.

There were people there who could have made it happen. But letting the radicals steal the show and trample down the non-islamist reformers was an absolute disgrace.

Where was the CIA? They were basically shut down, that's where.

And even failing to prevent the mullahs from taking over, when they violated our embassy, that was an ACT OF WAR, and Jimmah did not only "nothing." He bowed and scraped before the bullies, and made an example that still stands today of a US that is weak and spineless and bunch of [Mrs. Slocombe's cat]s.

He should have bombed the centers of government, command and control, totally take out their entire military capacity, and cut off their oil supplies. THEN talk, from a position of strength.

And when the USSR and China protested and threatened to intervene, call their bluff and give them the finger.

No, that's too "hawkish" for you. But that's what the President of the United States is hired to do.

Korla:

And if we had bombed them into submission, what would we have replaced them with?

It's easy to flatten a country, the question is "What do you next?"

Rance, it is quite simple. We should have told the Islamofacists that took over our embassy and kidnapped all our citizens that it had one week to hand them over or we bomb your ports. If they are not returned then, we bomb their industry. We would not have gotten to the port. They would have folded. But when Carter showed he was willing to talk it to death, they got the idea that we, America, is a paper tiget. Thank God GW Bush changed that impressions. ww

We can all breathe a sigh of relief knowing that WW is not nor ever will be our CIC but merely an armchair warrior.

Half a day after we tell them we are going to bomb their ports, guess where the hostages would be?

Besides, bombing the ports, etc. doesn't get rid of the revolutionary movement that put the kidnappers in power.

Rance, they would be alive, idiot. Even Iran realizes the diplomatic chaos that would happen around the world should the embassy personnel be murdered by the state. Come on, use some sense. There is no way you can defend Carter on this one. We are still paying for that lack of strength and leadership. ww

They wouldn't have been "murdered by the state" they would have been moved to the ports so that it have been the U.S.'s fault if they were harmed.

What is it with the right and bombing people back into the stone age? I guess if your only tool is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail. I'm glad that most of the people in control have large tool kits.

Jay: "For the first third of my life, we had three of the worst presidents (by most standards) in history, and we came out of it OK."

As others here have said, we're not 'out of it' yet. We are still paying the price for good-intentioned (or not) policies decades later.

I agree with your post for the most part, though.

I too, am looking forward to your "harpy-like" (? LOL!) disdain for the obvious title-wave of pronouncements from the presumptuous Obama. Although, even with McCain we would still have quite a few "damn, this is all we've got" complaints. Agreed. We are a strong enough nation and must carry on.

At least Obama will be fun to watch. Given his depth of executive experience, he makes Dan Quayle look like Winston Churchill.

Last point to Rance: We have many tools. The Islamofacists only understand and respect the "hammer." The Islamofacists do not hate republicans only, the hate and want to kill all americans. ww

When one compares Barack Hussein to Carter and Johnson, the whole premise is wrong. Carter and Johnson are actual idiots -- completely incapable. That is still much preferable to someone who is willfully malicious. For me (this is no exaggeration), I believe it safer to have Ahmadinejad as the next president of the U.S. rather than Barack Hussein, as at least the public knows where Ahmadinejad stands.