Posted on 10/11/2002 7:27:58 AM PDT by jstone78
It is now official, that Jimmy Carter is the Winner of the 2002 Nobel Prize: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=518&ncid=716&e=4&u=/ap/20021011/ap_on_re_eu/nobel_peace
Perhaps it is time we should examine Jimmy Carter's career as an ex-President objectively, without being influenced by ideological bias, or by the memories of his difficult Presidency of 1977 to 1981. We should also compare Carter's career as an ex-President, with the careers that other US Presidents have had after leaving office.
I have many friends who have worked as missionaries in remote and distant Third World countries. Many of them talk of running into Jimmy Carter in places you wouldn't believe, in deepest Asia, Africa, or Latin America. Some of those missionaries are very conservative in their politics, and voted against Carter in '76 and '80, but they admire the work he does for Habitat for Humanity and other organizations in distant lands. Carter has a long record of working with American missionaries in unreached lands. In addition to building homes for the poor, Carter also monitors elections, and has been involved in mobilizing resources to fight diseases such as his Guinea worm project in West Africa.
Many here will agree that there exists a real difference between Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, despite the fact that both are liberals. Conservatives disliked Carter for his policies, while they disliked Clinton for BOTH his character and policies. Carter made Americans feel weak, while Clinton made Americans feel ashamed. At least, American parents did not tell their children to leave the room, when Carter's conduct was being discussed on TV news. No sane parent would want their daughter to work for Clinton, but Carter seems to have his morals in check.
As we examine what Carter accomplished from 1981 to today, we can compare his career as an ex-President, to other successful ex-Presidents in history. Thomas Jefferson founded the University of Virginia, while John Adams penned some of the finest letters ever written. John Quincy Adams was involved in many things as ex-President, including serving as a defense lawyer in the Amistad case, while Grover Cleveland somehow managed to get his butt back to the White House after being defeated. President Andrew Johnson became a US Senator from Tennesse, while President Grant became a bestselling author. William Taft became Chief Justice of the United States, while President Hoover was heavily involved in numerous government projects, incuding the War effort. Teddy Roosevelt became a big game safari hunter for a while, before later making a fool of himself by damaging the Republican Party in 1912. Even Nixon had some modest success as a foreign policy consultant after the war.
Carter was, and still is, a buffoon.
No sane lech like Clinton would've wanted Carter's daughter, either.
...no kidding; I *think* I've just had a Zen experience.
Theodore Roosevelt ALSO won the Nobel Peace Prize for brokering a peace in the Russo-Japanese War.
Best Presidents of the 20th century IMHO: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and Theodore Roosevelt.
First, there's nothing wrong with any President having a career after the White House, particularly one devoted to public service. And certainly Mr. Carter's pursuits, however misguided they might be, are preferable to Slick Willie's Global Party Tour.
However, it must be noted that Mr. Carter's efforts are nothing more than a continuing effort to rebuild a shattered image. By any standard, Carter was the worst President of the 20th Century. His programs crushed our economy and left our foreign policy in shambles. Since then, Carter has been willing to embrace any dictator and observe any election in an effort to rehabilitate his standing.
Consider his policy "triumphs." Anwar Sadat deserves most of the credit for the Camp David trimuphs. Until Sadat told Walter Cronkite he was willing to go to Tel Aviv and talk peace, there was no U.S. effort to broker a peace deal. In Haiti, it was the presence of Colin Powell, not Jimmy Carter that changed the mind of the dictator Raoul Cedras. When Powell told General Cedras that the 82nd Airborne was enroute and prepared to eliminate him by force, the Haitian dictator had a change of heart. But (again), the liberal media gave the lion's share of credit to Carter.
Ditto North Korea. Pyongyang may embrace Carter, but they fear U.S. military might. Just years after the Gulf War, North Korea--which has studied the U.S. military trimpuh extensively--was unprepared to risk war over the nuclear issue. Talking to Carter gave them a way to strike a deal (and a bad one at that), while maintainng some face.
Carter's two-decade rehabilitation tour is a farce, as is his Nobel Prize. What a shame that the President who did more for World Peace that any other--Ronald Reagan--will never get the recognition he deserves....
The "Committee" is the Mad Hatters Tea Party!
"There you go again.."
IOW there is no sense in comparing Ronald Reagan's post-retirement accomplishments unfavorably with Jimmy Carter's . . . even though that one letter of Reagan's has been influential in its own way . . .
It would be kind of a "Miss Congeniality Award" . . .
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.