Welcome to PatsFans.com

Jimmy Carter: National Disgrace

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by QuiGon, Sep 29, 2006.

  1. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well now I've seen it all. Jimmy Carter, our own one-term national disgrace, is playing the pot calling the kettle black with some remarks about Bush. He says the Bush administration has brought "international disgrace" to the country.

    It's always nice to awake in the morning to one of the biggest laughs I've ever had in my entire life. :rofl:
     
  2. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Carter's right. He may not have accomplished anything, but that's better than what amount to Bush's negative accomplishments.
     
  3. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Since when are worsening an energy crisis and sitting there completely impotent while Americans are taken hostage half a world away not considered negative accomplishments..? Oh, I forget. You're part of the revisionist-history crowd....

    I guess you would enjoy waiting in line for 3 hours to get 5 gallons of gas.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  4. Turk

    Turk Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  5. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,150
    Likes Received:
    223
    Ratings:
    +537 / 6 / -2

    Let's not forget that it was his Administration that ok'd the training and funding of the mujahadeen in Afghanistan versus the Soviets. Not to mention it was he who sanctioned the fraudulent vote in Venezuella that put Hugo Chavez in power.
     
  6. Turk

    Turk Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    USA has been employing this moronic "my enemy's enemy is my ally" policy for too long for you to just put the Afghan thing on Carter alone, many before him and many after him have done the same. You have seen those pictures of Rummy shaking hands with Saddam and the ones of Bush holding the slimy hand of the Saudi Sheik, I am sure.
    Not to mention the WMD's that were used on Kurds and Iranians, where do you suppose Saddam got the know how or the parts for them?
    As far as the Chavez thing; fraudulent vote?
    Are you trying to say that Chavez is in power based upon fraudulent voting practices? What is he, a Republican?
    Seriously, you must mean when we tried unsuccessfully to overthrow him because that's when the whole world found out just how popular he was among his people. This was no Chile, and the Latin Americans had learned their lesson after we helped overthrow Allende, they were not going to tolerate it any more.
    Slinging mud and hoping that some of it will stick, at least you are consistent.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  7. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,875
    Likes Received:
    108
    Ratings:
    +240 / 8 / -13

    Yeah Carter did wonders for the economy too 20+ inflation anf 17% mortgage rates. Nothing negative there.....
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  8. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,817
    Likes Received:
    182
    Ratings:
    +371 / 11 / -28

    With regard to the latter, he is not alone here:

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005586

    Both the Bush Administration and former President Jimmy Carter were quick to bless the results of last month's Venezuelan recall vote, but it now looks like they were had. A statistical analysis by a pair of economists suggests that the random-sample "audit" results that the Americans trusted weren't random at all......

    Yes, it does. It would seem that Colin Powell and the Carter Center have some explaining to do. The last thing either would want is for Latins to think that the U.S. is now apologizing for governments that steal elections. Back when he was President, Mr. Carter once famously noted that the Afghanistan invasion had finally caused him to see the truth about Leonid Brezhnev. A similar revelation would seem to be in order toward Mr. Chavez.
     
  9. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,150
    Likes Received:
    223
    Ratings:
    +537 / 6 / -2

    Oh we agree completely here. I was simply trying to point out that Jimmy C is no one to talk about setting the country back 10 years. He's just as guilty, if not more to blame, than those before and after him. I've been trying to explain to you party folk that niether of you are much better than the other in most cases.


    He got the recipe from the US, and the ingredients from European companies and governments.


    You party people are funny here. So, if Gore was elected by through the same turn of events, would his win still be considered fraudulent in your eyes? Me thinks not.


    Um, you should really learn your history. The exit polls conducted by an independent entity showed the recall vote was 58% to 42% in favor of a Chavez defeat, just as the pre-election polls indicated. Yet, Jimmy Carter sanctioned the ballots after only being given a selected amount of ballots by Chavez. He completely ignored the calls of voter fraud and ok'd what Chavez told him to.


    http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_040820.htm

    http://www.nysun.com/article/719
     
  10. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    You don't read English very well, do you...? I made two points about the travesty that was the Carter administration before pointing out Pujo's propensity to engage in revisionist history. You call that "plenty of bullets for the messenger"..? :rofl:
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  11. Turk

    Turk Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Real World - Um, you should really learn your history. The exit polls conducted by an independent entity showed the recall vote was 58% to 42% in favor of a Chavez defeat, just as the pre-election polls indicated. Yet, Jimmy Carter sanctioned the ballots after only being given a selected amount of ballots by Chavez. He completely ignored the calls of voter fraud and ok'd what Chavez told him to.


    http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion.../mb_040820.htm

    http://www.nysun.com/article/719



    1. You are telling me to learn my history and sourcing two editorials to
    support your view. Editorials, articles represent the authors' views and
    are not exactly scientific sources to back-up your claims.
    2. Polls are just that, polls. They give you a sense, not the final results.
    To think that Chavez is not popular among his people is the real selective
    memory. Do I need to provide you with links, not of editorials, but actual
    photos of the tens of thousands of people on the streets when we did
    attempt to overthrow Chavez? He is more popular than Bush even in
    parts of our own country! I suspect a contest worldwide would result in
    a landslide in Chavez's favor, unless we have the Repub machines doing
    the tallying, of course:)
    3. As a Republican, you do not see the irony of you finding faults in another
    country's elections while the whole world watched firsthand how we
    handled ours, just like a third world country?
    4. Finally, Jimmy was not alone in his assessment of the Venezualan
    elections, guess who else did the same? Colin Powell and GWB! Will you be
    as critical of their "mis-read" as well? Or does the hammer only fall on
    Dems' heads in your house?
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  12. Turk

    Turk Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0


    This seems to be a pattern with you but I read English just fine and have no desire to engage in a sophomoric discussion where two opposing sides finish each sentence with some sort of immature insult for the other.

    The point that you missed by the way, was that Carter was the messenger(not Pujo) and the message was that shame has been brought upon our country. That is the message.
    No matter who is making us aware of it, Carter, Reagan, Elvis or Marilyn Manson.
    In other words, you had nothing to say about the shame that Carter mentioned, but plenty of what you thought of him.
    Have a nice day!
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  13. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,149
    Likes Received:
    478
    Ratings:
    +1,066 / 9 / -19

    #87 Jersey

    Jimmy Carter is entitled to his opinion. Carter was not a very good President but he is a good man who goes of his way to help people. For those reasons I don't think it's appropriate to bash the man for expressing his opinion.
    when you walk the walk you can talk the talk...and Carter does...What ever happened to Billy Beer?
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,150
    Likes Received:
    223
    Ratings:
    +537 / 6 / -2

    The source was an independent company used by the Clinton camps, Michael Bloomberg, and covered both the Mexican and DR elections. Their record is quite solid.

    http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_040820.htm

    Penn Schoen has no motive whatever for cheating. It is a reputable American firm in a competitive business. Over more than 20 years it has worked for successful American politicians like Bill Clinton in 1996, Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2001, Michael Bloomberg in 2001 and many others.


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]



    These leaders all spoke in front of large crowds. I guess, by your logic, that they all were, or are, extremely popular in their respective countries.




    Ah, I'm not a republican. I would never been stupid enough to sign my mind away to a political party. What does it mean to be republican anyway? A Democrat? Does it mean you have to be pro-life, but not for gun control? Or vice versa? I think it means you have to support the left or the right regardless of your personal views, that you are part of the herd, and not an individual thinker.



    I sure would be. The problem is that Powell and GW weren't signed on to monitor the election, Carter was. His foundation was there for that specific reason. The EU was so dismayed by the restrictions Chavez imposed upon election monitors that they refused to send any. They wouldn't comply, and thus be put in a position of having to rule over a fraudulent process.

    It's ok though, the people love him, anyone that says otherwise is arrested and put in jail, and in 2 months he'll make sure to invite Jimmy back to sanction his reelection.
     
  15. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,216
    Likes Received:
    197
    Ratings:
    +668 / 2 / -9

    Sissy Jimmy Carter's brother Billy would have made a better Presidnt than the little bible thumping weasle.

    Jimmy "Oh Rosylyn look, a flying saucer"
    Rosylyn "Thats swamp gas you little a$s hole"
     
  16. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yeah that's one of the many things that cracks me up about you: your hypocrisy and self righteousness. (Actually, I guess that's two things). You have no problem lobbing a "sophmoric" comment at someone else then, when they respond in kind, you turn around with the self righteous "I have no desire to engage in a sophmoric discussion" etc, etc, etc. :rolleyes:
    Well, I apologize for missing your poorly worded point. Nevertheless, it does nothing to change the fact that Carter was a national disgrace, an embarrassment and the worst president since Hoover (if not of all time).
     
  17. Turk

    Turk Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    [Ah, I'm not a republican. I would never been stupid enough to sign my mind away to a political party. What does it mean to be republican anyway? A Democrat? Does it mean you have to be pro-life, but not for gun control? Or vice versa? I think it means you have to support the left or the right regardless of your personal views, that you are part of the herd, and not an individual thinker.


    I sure would be. The problem is that Powell and GW weren't signed on to monitor the election, Carter was. His foundation was there for that specific reason. The EU was so dismayed by the restrictions Chavez imposed upon election monitors that they refused to send any. They wouldn't comply, and thus be put in a position of having to rule over a fraudulent process.

    It's ok though, the people love him, anyone that says otherwise is arrested and put in jail, and in 2 months he'll make sure to invite Jimmy back to sanction his reelection.[/QUOTE]




    You consistently defend Bush and the Republican agenda and yet have a problem with being called a Republican.
    One does not have to call himself anything, his words and actions speak loudly as to where he stands on issues.
    I never claimed that Bush and/or Powell and/or anyone else in the current administration were assigned to monitor the elections in Venezuela, but to claim that they did not, with every bit of information available to them is partisanship, at best. So, is it your claim then that the current administration made a mistake, that they were wrong?
    That the POTUS had less information available to him than Carter who was there as a representative of a foundation?
    Chavez was a bit suspicious of having a ton of outsiders monitoring, wouldn't you be, if you were him? Hell, we tried to take him down because we are in business with the landlords, the rich and powerful of his country.
    You can claim all day long that Chavez is in power fraudulently, and that argument will have as much credibility as the war you also keep supporting, in my view.
    By the way, having crowds during visits or speeches is slightly different than having tens of thousands take to the streets when a leader is illegally overthrown with the help of another government.
    And since we are on the subject of doing the right/legal/moral thing: isn't that type of interference wrong, as well?
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2006
  18. Turk

    Turk Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0


    Here you go again.
    My comment was:
    "This seems to be a pattern with you but I read English just fine and have no desire to engage in a sophomoric discussion where two opposing sides finish each sentence with some sort of immature insult for the other."
    This was after your insulting comment about if I could read English.

    I did not call you sophomoric, just pointed out that you seem to enjoy the name-calling, and that it leads into nothing constructive and turns the discussion into a sophomoric name calling match.
    But hey, if it pleases you, keep up the fight, more power to you.

    By the way, just because you have failed to grasp the message, does not mean the message was poorly worded, but of course that would be a funny thing to admit to, after attempting to degrade my grasp of the English language.
     
  19. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,150
    Likes Received:
    223
    Ratings:
    +537 / 6 / -2

    I constantly defend Bush from illogical and idiotic bashing. If Clinton were in office and some idiot criticized Clinton cuz his name was Bill Clinton I'd defend Clinton too when deserved. I have stated many times that I am an Independent conservative. Conservative meaning I believe in fiscal sanity and small government. Used to be that that would lean me toward the republican parties base principles. Where that aligns me with today's GOP & GW is beyond me. I've said 1,000 times that Bush has spent more than any liberal could dream. The GOP has done more to hurt conservativism than is imaginable. If the republican agenda is amnesty for illegals, detainee torture, endless incarceration for Guatanamo detainee's, pissing on the Constitution, overturning Roe V. Wade, and funding religious groups with federal dollars, then I'm no republican. That the conversation in this forum amounts to Bush bashing, or the Iraq war, is not something I can control. Lets discuss some other important topics and we'll see how "republican" I am.



    You said this:

    Originally Posted by Turk
    4. Finally, Jimmy was not alone in his assessment of the Venezualan
    elections, guess who else did the same? Colin Powell and GWB! Will you be
    as critical of their "mis-read" as well? Or does the hammer only fall on
    Dems' heads in your house?


    Lets see if we can straighten this out one more time. Jimmy Carter MONITORED the election. He sanctioned the results. That is far different from what Powell and GW did. Powell and GW did not monitor the election. They could only go from what Jimmy's group told them. So GW's "assessment" cannot be compared with Carter's. I've replied that I would be critical of their saying the elections were proper. But it's one thing to compare individuals who read a report and opine, to the person who wrote the darn report in this first place.


    I'd be suspicious when trying to fix an election too. What red flags me, is the fact that the socialist loving EU refused to be pawn in sanctioning a fraudulent election. They would not agree to the massive restrictions put forth by Chavez, and decided to skip the election entirely.

    We tried to take him down? And what does supporting A have to do with B? So my support for IRaq, a war I did not want prior to April 2003, makes my credibility on everything else worthless? HA! Spoken like a true mentally challenged soul.

    Sure it's wrong. When Jimmy Carter was putting puppets up in Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, etc...all was well and dandy. Remember that ALL presidents have meddled far too much for our own good. Hopefully recent events have taught us something.

    As for the speeches bit, HUH? Saddam had massive crowds when he spoke, as did Manuel Noreaga, Fidel Castro, Jozeph Stalin, even that lunatic Karimov gets crowds in Uzbekistan. How'd some of these clowns get into office?
     
  20. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,084
    Likes Received:
    190
    Ratings:
    +265 / 10 / -11

    That intrigued me, especially since I hadn't read about it and didn't get much press. According to this site, the people who did the field work for the exit poll were the people who organized the recall!

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Penn,_Schoen_&_Berland

    PSB's Venezuela poll raised eyebrows for several reasons: the opposition to Hugo Chavez seized upon it as proof that "the results from the vote itself were fraudulent"; the poll results "were sent out by fax and e-mail to media outlets and opposition offices more than four hours before polls closed," in violation of Venezuelan law; "members of Sumate, a Venezuelan group that helped organize the recall initiative, [did] the fieldwork for the poll"; and remarks to media went beyond poll results and analysis to election commentary - Mark Penn told Associated Press that Doug Schoen "believes there were more problems with the voting than with the exit poll."

    As for Carter, while his record is mixed, the recession started to lift at the end of his term, not after Reagan got into office. Also, as an American, I am proud that he made human rights a central part of our foreign policy, and I also admire him for implementing a Middle East policy that made continuous (though slow) progress right up until Bush II tried the disastrous approach that will be his legacy. QuiGon should really read about Carter -- he even did some things that he would probably agree with and I would disagree with.

    This was an interesting paragraph in the Wikipedia article: "Although the Carter team had successfully negotiated with the hostage takers for release of the hostages, an agreement trusting the hostage takers to abide by their word was not signed until January 19, 1981, after the election of Ronald Reagan. The hostages had been held captive for 444 days, and their release happened just minutes after Carter left office. However, Reagan asked Carter to go to Germany to greet the hostages." Pretty decent of Ronnie.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>