Posted on 08/06/2005 3:18:34 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
Jimmy Carter, the peanut farmer and former U.S. President, has a huge problem: his mouth. The things emanating from that orifice are bizarre in the extreme, considering that Carter was arguably the worst president in the history of the United States. His most recent foot-in-mouth episode involves his running commentary on George W. Bush’s veracity and the "atrocities" committed by American soldiers in the war on terrorism. Carter maintains that had the U.S. not waged war against the Taliban who were sponsors of Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network, or deposed Saddam Hussein, then the Islamic terrorists would have no excuse for attacking the West.
To say this sentiment is naïve is charitable, given Carter’s history of extreme failure as America’s 39th president. For those too young to remember, under Carter’s tenure in the White House inflation and interest rates rose to their highest levels since the Second World War. In 1978 interest rates of 20 percent were not unheard of, as Carter dithered with the U.S. economy. It was also under Carter’s watch that Iranian fundamentalist Muslims took 66 American diplomats hostage and held them for 444 days, while Carter was powerless to do anything but posture.
It is ironic that this happened, as Carter was directly responsible for the Ayatollah Khomeini’s takeover of Iran. Carter had decided that Mohammed Reza Palavi, the Shah of Iran and a committed friend of the United States, wasn’t democratic enough for Carter’s taste. As a result, Carter insisted the Shah democratize his regime, the result of which was the takeover of Iran by the Ayatollah when the Shah left Iran for cancer treatment in the U.S.
More ironically still, the takeover of Iran by the Islamic fundamentalists emboldened Saddam Hussein, who had just begun his tenure as absolute dictator of Iraq. Believing that the departure of the Shah and the chilling of American/Iranian relations would render Iran ripe for an invasion, Saddam attacked Iran in hopes of securing that country’s oil fields and deposing the Shia Muslim theocracy there. The result was that over 1,000,000 men died during that conflict, which remained at a stalemate for years.
Had Carter not been instrumental in deposing the Shah, then Saddam would likely have remained a bit player in the region, which might have resulted in greater stability.
In 2002, Carter was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development". This sounds to me like it may have been the booby prize, given that Carter actually never accomplished anything concrete that resulted in the resolution of international conflicts, the advancement of democracy or even the promotion of economic and social development. Quite the opposite, as under Carter’s reign the "misery index", which was Carter’s own invention (leave it to a Democrat to focus on misery), climbed by over 50 percent! But then, we have to remember that the Nobel Peace prize also went to Yassar Arafat, the notorious murderer who is responsible for thousands of deaths, both among Israelis as well as Palestinians.
It’s so characteristic of Democrats in the U.S. to take total failures, flunkies who accomplish less than nothing, and elevate them to some mythical pantheon of liberal heroes because they had good intentions. My grandmother used to tell me that the road to hell was paved with them.
he should renounce the entire organization that awarded him the peace prize and take a stand for justice. Let's not forget his flirtations with Fidel Castro. Now, here is a real human rights activist! How many people did Fidel have incarcerated and tortured in Cuba?
Rather than trying to score political points with those who are trying to kill us, Jimmy Carter might be well advised to read some history. I strongly recommend European history between, say, 1930 and 1945. There are some wonderful lessons to be learned in the comparison between Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill. The former, Like Jimmy Carter, wanted to appease the enemy, while the latter, Like George Bush, took steps to defend his country.
Rôle of President Jimmy Carter Emerging in Illegal Financial Demands on Shah of Iran
You know, and I'm serious about this, to this DAY I still have a hard time talking about Jimmy Carter. I was in high school when he became our President, and it is the only time in my life that I felt like running away to Canada. We all know how all of us feel about Slick Willie, but Carter was (imho) so much worse because he was so much more devious. When you looked at x42 you could see what he was in plain sight. But Carter, well, I'll just end with what I've said here. Not a very easy subject for me even now.
Jimmy Carter is a poor excuse for an American. I am glad that he helps to build houses, "Habits for Humanity" or I would know nothing good about him at all.
I know the answer to this one. He's still breathing!
Thanks for the maps. Do you have a map of the 76 election? I think comparing and contrasting 76 to 80 would be telling as well.
That is true!
The Shah bought AWACS, but Carter didnt deliver them to Iran.
It was my first election and is on my home page.
Good golly. You mean to tell me Gerald Ford won every state west of the Mississip besides Texas?
The media had demonized Reagan so that I still wonder if he could have beaten Carter had he won the nomination in 1976.
Ford was not your most competent president either. The Nixon pardon was ill-timed. He tried to deal with inflation by having everyone wear WIN (whip inflation now) buttons. LBJ's comment that he played football too many times without a helmet seemed appropriate during the pivotal moment of the debates when Ford let Carter run to his right with the dumb-a**ed statement that Poland was not dominated by the Soviet Union. Plus there was a lot of southern pride involved-- they hadn't had one of their own in the White House since 1921.
Interestingly four of the last five presidents have come from the south, two of the four have been absolute disasters and the one non-Southerner has been, hands down, the best president in at least the last century.
I think that feeling is lunch.
Carter easily the worst president ever.
he loved Arab dictators and hated Jews (unless dead or apostate)
Carter hated the Shah.
That is very true!
Shah wanted Reagan or Ford to win the election!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.