On 15 Feb 2008 14:43:30 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:uauar31ukl8mr8kn8oqt1kn6e6pe5vpvjh@
4ax.com:

Well, I suppose...the main problem, at least as I see it, is the last
time there was some wild ball-smacking going on, the US got 4 years of
Jimmy Carter...who, IMO, is a decent, honorable man but also who, if he
had just a little more experience, might have made one fine POTUS...as
such, I'm not going to be surprised if Obama has a female running
mate...Geraldine Ferraro...


Fine point. Every time a Republicans put a scumbag who abuses his powers
in office, it seems like the Dems put a less than optimal president up
next. You think those Dems would learn.

Actually, you'd think those who say "he/she stands for 'change' plus
he/she isn't a insert whatever party" would learn. And speaking of
power-abusing scumbags and their less-than-optimal replacements, hell,
the GOP _and_ the Dems did the same thing after Clinton...well, so the
Dems didn't win, but only because they went with
a-WHOLE-LOT-less-than-optimal rather than merely less-than-optimal...

IAC, you may wish to recall that Carter replaced Ford, not Nixon, and
Ford was probably the best overall candidate between the two (Carter and
Ford)...heck, he wasn't even a scumbag or an abuser of his powers...

TC,
R