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.
Presidential Leadership, by James Taranto (WSJ) and Leonard Leo (Federalist Society) have Carter listed tenth worst today, better than Nixon but moving down fast. Worst, Buchanan then Harding. Nixon and Carter are the only two in the bottom ten. Clinton is in the middle as Average, but falling, and Reagan listed as Near Great and rising.
Ack! I almost voted for Anderson, but I decided not to throw my vote away, and went with Reagan.
Got to vote for Tip O'Neal's opponent, too, in that election. That didn't do any good, though.
If the MSM was even remotely honest, all they had to do was tell the truth about Governor Bill Clinton.
Asking the MSM to tell the truth about Clinton, or other Democrats for that matter, is impossible today. Just watch the MSM go ga-ga over Hillary in the months to come. FOX News, the WSJ, Internet, talk radio, bloggers and Free Republic are the few sources for learning the truth.
Better late than never. Don't worry you have lots of good company.
We are a military family. Thanks for your service.
Carter's tenure was the nadir of this country, whose recovery began on January 20, 1981.
Truly a turning point in history.
The "Trouble" with Jimmy Carter is that he's still breathing oxygen.
5.56mm
carter is an embarrassment to American loving citizens...
Goes to show you NEVER elect a So. Baptist as president.
Carter
Clinton
Gore
Have a link to the article? Searched Ianian.com but couldn't locate. Thanks
Reagan and Tip O'Neill were two Irishmen who disagreed on nearly everything except that it was nice to have Irish blood in ya.
That didn't hurt him a bit. ;)
Nice maps!
The second map gives a hint of the states we have trouble with now.....shaded in lighter blue....upper midwest, northeast, Pacific coast, New Mexico....
You must be ignorant of what Bill Clinton did but was never charged with doing (in your face treason).. Carter was a malicious fool, Clinton was an intelligent malicious malefactor, globally and domestically. George Bush leaving most of Clintons appointees in their positions was as stupid as something Carter would have done..
"I'm a Unite'er and not a Divide'er", was something Carter might have said.. Leaving Tenant as head of the CIA was stupid and it took 6 years to get Porter Goss in there too, still that mess is not cleaned up.. The only thing Bush has not done stupid is listening to Cheney and Rumsfeld.. Colon Powell almost screwed that up too.. for sure Colin Powells son (head of the FCC) screwed up that bureau.. cBS investigated THEMSELVES, remember, while the FCC dithered on the 300 million dollar budget they have (2005)... The FCC is a useless money pit.. FEATHERBEDDED too..
Bush ain't too smart.. The "powers" that ran Bush against Al Gore and sKerry are the smart ones.. Those same "powers" WILL get Hillary elected too.. Wait and see.. In 2008 the "power" will select a RINO to run against her AND SHE WILL WIN..
A sound rap in the chops.
I felt the same way. I used to give Carter the benefit of the doubt and assume he was just an incompetent oaf who was in over his head. But his constant coddling to terrorist and brutal thugs and dictators worldwide, and his relentless bashing of our efforts to rid the world of this scum, make me think of him more as a treasonous POS who belongs in the crapheap of history.
Jimmuh was actually a blessing from God in disguise.
As with many blessings, you have to pay first before you get your blessing. Jimmuh, all by himself and in his own idiotic way, single handedly set the table for the current demise of the rat party.
Wasn't the top Federal income tax rate at 70% also during his tenure? If not, what was it? Because when Reagan got in, that is the first thing he did, reduced it to 35% or something, the dems freaked out!!
The painful sequence I remember, never mentioned by the press, is that Iran bought some new high end jet fighters from the US, many billions of dollars worth paid in full. Carter decided to 1) cancel the sale after the jets were built, and 2) not give Iran any of their money back.
Where in the Bible does it say you can treat people that way and not get what you got coming?
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.