Posted on 10/12/2002 9:05:34 AM PDT by TCSparkman
Nobel Prize Awarded to "Goobers"
By Dr. Steven Plaut Saturday, October 12, 2002
In an era when Yassir Arafat and Shimon Peres hold Nobel Peace Prizes, I suppose none of us should find it too surprising that Jimmy Carter gets awarded one.
Jimmy Carter, Mister Peanut from Plains, Georgia, was without a doubt the worst American president in the post-World War II era, and possibly the very worst president ever. True, Clinton would be a major contender, but Clinton will be remembered for his sneaky sleaze, underhandedness, and sly dishonesty, whereas Carter will be remembered for his disgracing America, for his appeasement and defeatism, for his anti-Americanism, for his cowardice and pandering to terrorists, and most of all for his overwhelming stupidity.
Carter was without a doubt awarded the prize as a slap at the Bush Administration. The Scandinavian leftists who award the Nobel Prize do not like Americans who believe in using armed force against Islamist fascism or in defending America, and their very best role model for coddling Islamist terror and fascism and for American self-abasement is Jimmy Carter.
Goobers Carter took America to its all-time security low. He groveled before the Iranians who held American hostages. He disarmed America. He brought the American economy to a ruin. He produced the highest inflation rate since the Civil War, a fact that no doubt endeared him to the Scandinavian socialists of the Nobel Committee, and a high unemployment rate. And he led the campaign to appease the Soviet Union, insisting communism was here to stay, all this eight years before it utterly collapsed.
But more than anything else, Carter will be remembered for his bashing Israel. He is the one whose affirmative action appointee to the UN, Andrew Young, launched the jihad for Palestinian statehood in the American foreign-policy establishment. He sucked up to Jesse Jackson. He led the campaign to dismember Israel and reward PLO terror. He spent his years since getting kicked out of the White House in one of America's greatest election landslides lobbying the world on behalf of the PLO, campaigning for sanctions against Israel, and, of course, for Israel's Oslo national suicide. SO I suppose he has everything it takes today to be a Nobel Prize winner.
Carter was the symbol of appeasement, stupidity, detachment for reality, weakness, and timidity. So in all of this he will share his prize well with Rabin and Peres.
Carter's stupidity is still a matter of bitter humor. We recall his infantile attempt to be an Alpha male and talk about his lusting after women, a matter which led to that famous cartoon of him gazing at the Statue of Liberty and imagining her naked. This was the peanut-brain from Plains, the dumber brother of Billy Carter. Alongside, there was the IQ-challenged Georgia mafia, imported to Washington to learn about indoor plumbing in the executive branch. There were the sleaze and the drug taking by his senior staff.
So who really does deserve a Nobel Peace Prize?
Answer: The greatest living American President. The man who undid Carter's appeasements and coddling of Islamist terror. The man who put fear into the hearts of America-haters. The man who believed in using force to block communism, who fearlessly labeled communism the Empire of Evil. The president under whose administration the GROWTH in the US economy was larger than the SIZE of the entire economy of Germany. The man who restored American self-respect. The man responsible for the end of the Cold War. The president hated by Scandinavian appeasers and Eurocowards: Ronald Reagan.
Ford deserved to lose in 1976. He had done some good in the two years he was in office, but there was no way to excuse the pardon of Nixon. It just looked bad, no matter what the reason, and it should never have happened.
Second, Carter was a good, decent man. I don't have a lot of patience for some of the things he's said and done in he last few years, but when he was president, he was okay. He was handed an economy that was in worse shape than it had been since the great depression, and a foreign policy obstacle in Iran that was the result of three decades of bipartisan American foreign policy. Any president, Republican or Democrat, would have had a tough time with the situations he faced in the late 70s.
Third, the Nobel Prize. Frankly, he should have won it in 1978 or 1979. Those who are old enough to have been aware of politics in the 70s will remember what an awesome achievement it was to negotiate a settlement between Egypt and Israel. Yes, things have gone badly since then, and the Prize given to Arafat in the early 90s was inexcusable -- but that doesn't lessen Carter's achievement in 1978.
Finally, it's simply ludicrous, and betrays the authors prejudice and unthinking kneejerk attitudes to suggest that Carter was the worst president of the post-war era. Clinton, Nixon and Johnson all come to mind as candidates for that title -- and I would even throw Bush I into the mix. The fact is that we've had a succession of bad presidents since about 1965. At least with Carter, we knew he wasn't corrupt, and that he was trying to do what he thought was right. That counts for a lot in my book, even if I didn't always agree with his policies.
"Mandela picks Iraq over U.S. Posted by Enterprise to Rye On News/Activism Oct 11 4:50 PM #12 of 47
"Three goobers and a bumbling peanut farmer represent peace! Ha!"
Restoring honor and dignity to the world is going to be one tough uphill climb.
So out of all the presidents since '65, you like Carter?
I'll choose Reagan. Our current president comes in second.
I'd choose Nixon before Carter. It's really too bad the bunny didn't get him.
Jimmy Carter never met a terrorist he didnt like.
Nixon over Carter? You bet! The only Commander-in-Chief worse than Carter (in recent history)(remember 444 days of hostages in Tehran?) was Hitlery and The Rapist
It's like Jimmy got asked out on a date by the prettiest girl in school...then finding out she only did it to piss off the ex-boyfriend.
You have it right.
Carter was a lame president. He has done some nice things after his presidency, but his term in office was a disaster for the U.S.A. and the world.
The N.P. committee wanted to 'send a message'.
I now send them a message: "Read my upraised middle finger!"
I would agree that he is not the worst president of the post-war era and agree with most of your nominees. Much of the anti-Carter rhetoric in here is probably just "piling on" in view of the recent Nobel prize, soon we can get back to the usual piling on Clinton ;-). Thanks for the post.
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.