Maybe, says John Stossel:
The parallels between the first years in office of Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter are striking, according to James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation. Like Obama, Carter followed an unpopular president. Carter’s Year One was invested in diplomacy and image-making.
His energy was dedicated almost exclusively to “making nice” on the world stage. It’s what drove his actions in the Israeli-Egyptian peace process, at strategic-arms limitation talks and in negotiating the Panama Canal Treaty.
It was a perpetual exercise in “soft power.”
A poor economy led Carter to scale down our military presence in the world. Year Two brought threats from around the world.
A Soviet-backed coup in Afghanistan paved the way for Moscow’s future invasion of the country. Demonstrations against the shah wracked the Iranian regime, paving the way for revolution and the rise of the ayatollahs. Trouble erupted across Africa, from Somalia to Zaire and Zambia, some of it inspired by Soviet meddling…
America’s enemies had taken measure of the man during his first, change-filled year in office. They saw weaknesses they could exploit. In the second year, they made their move.
As Year One ends for President Obama, he faces increasing belligerence from Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Al Qaeda-related attacks increase. Obama’s charm offensive with our enemies doesn’t seem too be working well so far.
Obama has the lens of history for guidance. Perhaps the President will consider the experience of his fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner.
The good thing about surviving Carter was the emergence of Reagan. The problem today is that there are no Reagans, just RINOs.
