Thanks to reader Dave, who sent this note accompanying the photo of a “Re-Elect President Carter 2004” bumper sticker:
“I took this while stopped at a light on MLK Blvd in Baltimore. Now, if it said “Re-elect Carter 2012″ I would have thought to myself ‘Oooh, clever commentary on the job the president is doing, I want one”. But it doesn’t, it says “Re-elect Carter 2004″. Huh? W=Carter?? Hoping for Jimmy to run instead of Kerry? What does it mean? I wonder if any of your readers get it, frankly, it’s right over my head.”
——————————————–
Related Post:
Bumper Stickers – The Series
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Limbaugh on Daniels
"In the Washington Post today, there's a blog published by Chris Cillizza, and it is obvious that both Republican Washington insiders, as well as Democrat power brokers want the nominee to be Mitch Daniels."
Rush Limbaugh
I recall seeing something like that around Los Angeles, then. It's a pretty straightforward joke equating a Kerry 1st term with a 2nd for Carter.
Re Daniels:
It's claimed that Republicans usually win when they clearly differentiate themselves from Democrats. When they are too timid to differentiate themselves, they tend to lose.
Daniels has been described as too bland to face the (pseudo-)charismatic Obama.
Just sayin'.
The beginning of the MSM reinvention of Sarah Palin?
The Tragedy of Sarah Palin
Lets face it, Carter was the biggest loser in the raid on Abottabad. Up until Bin Laden's sudden demise, Obama had been making Carter look good.