calls a spade a spade

[46zilzal]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/20/carter.bush.ap/index.html

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah....ok then.....talk about the POT calling the KETTLE black!!! :lol:

Carter: IRAN holds US HOSTAGE for 444 days
Carter: 14% INFLATION

Carter: The fruits of Carter's history with Iran are even more rotten (http://www.iranianvoice.org/article774.html). Carter's abandonment of the shah in 1977-78 helped lead to the Islamic revolution (and the murder or imprisonment of many of the Iranian leftists who had supported overthrowing the shah), the emboldening of the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan and the rise of radical Islam worldwide. His botched approach (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/01/18/iran/main265244.shtml) to the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979 inspired Islamic terrorists all over the world, culminating in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Carter: Wherever U.S. interests have been imperiled and a temporary "peace" could be bought at the expense of long-term security, Carter has always been on board. The late Democratic Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan summed it up when he said (http://voluntaryxchange.typepad.com/voluntaryxchange/2004/07/a_jimmy_carter_.html) of Carter in 1980, "Unable to distinguish between our friends and our enemies, he has essentially adopted our enemies' view of the world."

Meddler and Failure

Another of Jimmy Carter's dubious legacies has been the now common habit of former presidents meddling in current politics. Carter has made many an enemy among both Republican and Democratic administrations by undermining their foreign policies via the Carter Center. As Chris Suellentrop put it in an article (http://www.slate.com/id/2065887/) for Slate magazine, Carter has "difficulties coming to grips with the fact that he … [is] not president."

Despite the overwhelming evidence of failure, Carter has become something of a sacred cow to many liberals, who often express outrage when their hero is criticized. But no one who inserts himself into the public sphere is above criticism. And how quickly Carter's fans forget the malaise that gripped the nation under his presidency.

My own childhood memories of the time consist mostly of long lines snaking around gas stations due to the embargo on Iranian oil, not to mention a general feeling in the country of want and hopelessness. Carter may have inherited a recession, but his presidency did little to improve the weak economy. This was among the reasons that he lost re-election to Ronald Reagan in 1980. Yet somehow Carter's presidency is still held up by some as a shining example for the current leadership to follow.


All the above quotes come from this interesting piece, written in 2006:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2006/12/13/cstillwell.DTL

I suggest all who think of Carter as some sort of hero read the above again and again.

[JustRalph]

I will never forget walking into the bank to pick up the paperwork for my first car loan and the rate printed on the form was (depending on your credit history) between 16 and 21 percent. Needless to say......... I didn't apply.

The malaise mentioned above I will never forget.

[wonatthewire1]

I will never forget walking into the bank to pick up the paperwork for my first car loan and the rate printed on the form was (depending on your credit history) between 16 and 21 percent. Needless to say......... I didn't apply.

The malaise mentioned above I will never forget.



All Fed executives live with nightmare of the early 1970s, when they began their careers. The US was running huge deficits, was locked into an unpopular foreign war, and then commodity prices began to soar.

These conditions might sound familiar to some :)

The Fed lost control of inflation, partly due to political reasons. Lyndon Johnson and then Richard Nixon prevailed upon the Fed not to aggressively raise interest rates as inflation crept up. When the El Nino effect hit Peruvian anchovy production, and the Russians swept in and bought up all the spare American wheat, food prices soared, on the back of soaring oil prices.

This became the wage-price spiral. It took Reagan firing the air traffic controllers, and Paul Volker imposing 21% interest rates and the deepest recession of the postwar years, to bring an end to it.

No Fed Governor or their adviser wants to have that on their tombstone, the way Arthur Burns did under President Nixon.

So Fed executives (and European Central Bank ones even more) will strike preemptively against rising inflation.

In a world of higher inflation, we will have higher (real) and nominal interest rates.

[Tom]

That was funny I didn't bother to mention it yesterday.
It took three republican terms to fizx the damage that peanut shcuking fool did to thsi country.
Carter was a failure on every level. There were no highlights to his presidency - he was a joke on the world stage.

The world hates Bush for his commitmmets and perserverence, they laughed at Carter because from day 1 it was obvious he had no idea what he was doing.
And now add senile to that.:lol::lol::lol:

[GaryG]

I keep waiting for him to build me a house....

[bigmack]

If Jimmy C really wants to hurl an insult at Bush he ought to say; He's a worse President than even I was.

[Tom]

Jimmy Carter - one of the founding fathers of modern terrorism.
Anytime someone says negotiate with terrorists, just remember this guy.:ThmbDown:

[Light]

Carter recieved the "Nobel Peace Prize" in 2002 :

"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"

At least Carter brokered a major peace deal in the Middle East,between Israel and Egypt without firing a shot. Compare that to Bush's idea of solutions to international conflicts such as "shock and awe",world alienation,non negotiation,forced government,endless occupation,$2 billion a week for war but not the poor,corrupt cabinet members,Guatanomo and secret surveillance of American citizens. What a guy :ThmbDown:

[philsfan07]

Carter recieved the "Nobel Peace Prize" in 2002 :

"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"

:ThmbDown:

Um, I thought we were talking about the years he was in office?

[Light]

Um, I thought we were talking about the years he was in office?

Correct.His M.E. peace accord came about during his term in office

[Lefty]

light, so did Gorbachev and that was a joke too. A lib organization giving other libs' and communists prizes. LOL.

[philsfan07]

Correct.His M.E. peace accord came about during his term in office

I wonder if you were one of the US hostages if, during each of those 444 days, you were thankful that Carter was so peaceful?

And from an economy perspective, 16 percent inflation, 22 percent interest rates, and 70 percent marginal tax rates.. Wow.. Thank you sir, may I have another?

[Lefty]

Lucky, me I bght a new Mobile Home in 1978, 19% interest. OUCH!

[Tom]

Let's give the credit for peace to Israel and Egypt. Carter was not the driving force - the participants were. Cater was gven the NPP for rollingover and doing notning to defend or support the USA - which is what the socialist countries give awards for. Iran took our people hostage, he did nothing, so he gets an award? They should have hung the hapless OSB.
In your definitino of peacemakers, should Tojo get one too? Or doens't it count if you surrender?

BTW Light, Rush Limbaugh is nominated for the NPP this year.:lol:

[GaryG]

In your definitino of peacemakers, should Tojo get one too? Or doens't it count if you surrender?Some of these guys get pretty peaceful after you drop a couple of nukes on them...:lol:

[philsfan07]

Correct.His M.E. peace accord came about during his term in office

You don't seem to understand the conecept of doing harm by doing nothing.

[bigmack]

Former President Jimmy Carter on Monday said his comments over the weekend about the Bush administration were “careless.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18759682/

[delayjf]

Lets not forget the nuclear treaty he negotiated with the N. Koreas.

[Light]

BTW Light, Rush Limbaugh is nominated for the NPP this year.:lol:

Limbaugh was nominated for the NPP by Landmark Legal Foundation . A conservative public interest law firm,for which Limbaugh serves as an unpaid member of their board of advisors. Some nomination. Its one thing to be nominated,another to win it. Your buddy,Al Gore has also been nominated.

[Tom]

That both are nominees shows how riduclous the award is. Neither has done anyting for peace.

How can you leave out Bush and Rumsfled?:lol:
Wage a war not return fire.

[bigmack]

I'd kill for a Noble Peace Prize. They look good on a resume'

[philsfan07]

Gore has to be nominated for SOMETHING.. If for nothing else than the concept of Global Warming meetings being snowed out twice this year. Is there an award for Irony?

[JustRalph]

All Fed executives live with nightmare of the early 1970s, when they began their careers. The US was running huge deficits, was locked into an unpopular foreign war, and then commodity prices began to soar.

These conditions might sound familiar to some :)


If my memory serves me well enough, I think I was talking about 1979?

[wonatthewire1]

If my memory serves me well enough, I think I was talking about 1979?


Yep, you are correct...the lead up to the economic disaster took a long time - with the money that we spent in 'Nam, the gas shortage > remember when Nixon froze wages to keep inflation in check?

Took a long time to get to Carter, but the damage was done > and it had to be taken care of; or the economic boom times during Regan and Clinton would have been very difficult to achieve. Interesting times > Volker's high interest rates cooled everything down so that the economy could be better "managed" > though as Greenspan found out, that is not always going to be a smooth ride.

I always find it interesting to revisit economic history > we tend to blame people in place for things that simply "blow up" by the time they get into office. The same thing happened to Bush with the market tanking when he took office - that long climb during the Clinton years was destined to have some sort of pullback (retracement of the up market). But it is almost always the Prez that gets blamed when the inevitable happens...just the way it goes.

[Lefty]

Won, the diff is Bush cut taxes and brght the economy back. Carter in his time just made things worse.

[Snag]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/20/carter.bush.ap/index.html

46, do you ever have an original thought, or do just post other peoples?

[46zilzal]

46, do you ever have an original thought, or do just post other peoples?
plenty of them but, unlike many here, I find substantiation just like a thesis.

[Tom]

Like an e-ventriloquist, huh?

[Light]

I find the righties on this board really uninformed on some issues they discuss. They wont believe what you say and you have to give a link to prove it,and then they'll accuse you of being a so and so.Understandably,they have blinkers on and do not want to know anything FOX news or Rush wont tell them.

[Lefty]

light, the right is more informed than the left will ever be. Just because some leftwing blog says something doesn't make it so. Rush and Hannity and others give opinions based on fact, but they're still opionions and we are free to accept or reject them. Since I blve in fighting for freedom against all terrorists, and i blve, because it has been proven, that lower taxes spur a strong economy and i blve in the right of the fetus to reach maturity without being sucked down a drain; i remain on the right. When the left says govt prgms work when most of the money is wasted on bureacracy and only cents on the dollar reach the intended goal. and when the left says our govt was behind 9-11 and that we are the terrorists in the Middle East, then it's the left that's uninformed or lying.

[delayjf]

they have blinkers on and do not want to know anything FOX news or Rush wont tell them.

The same could be said about the left, CNN and moveon.org. I would mention Al Franken but apparently not many thought much of what he had to say. :lol:

[lsbets]

The difference between the Camp David accords and now is Egypt wanted to make peace. The Palestinians have no interest in living peaceably side by side with Jews. They want to "drive them into the sea". Israel has shown a willingness to negotiate with the Palestinians, the Palestinians have shown no interest in peace. They are living in a cuilture of death. Look what happenned when Israel put up the wall- they couldn't kill Israelis anymore so they started killing each other. Its sick.

[Light]

The difference between the Camp David accords and now is Egypt wanted to make peace.

Wrong again as usual. The difference was Carter. Sadat and Begin hardly talked to eachother.It was Carter who wanted peace and when the talks broke off he tried another tactic which was to meet with each one seperatly,then travel over to the other one to relay what they said,came up with compromises and went back and forth several times like a messenger boy. Extraordinary for an American President. Without Carter's persistence,there would be no peace today between those two.

[Light]

light, the right is more informed than the left will ever be.

Thats impossible. It is in the interest of the righties who have controlled this country to withold damaging factual information. And it is in the interest of the Left to disclose that damaging factual information.

[Tom]

The tooth ferry was in there too.

[Lefty]

light, what fantasy world do you live in? The mainstream media has been controlled by the left for years. Only talk radio is the pervue of the right to dissiminate truth instead of the lefts usual fiction. But why don't you just give some examples? Wanna start with the CBS story about Bush and the Guard docs? Oh, that lie was disspelled by the right.
Your turn.

[Lefty]

light, here's one, The leftwing media, NBC?, gives Hillary a chance to answer the rumors that Bill is having sex with an intern. She said it was a "rightwing conspiracy." She wasn't challenged. They shined there with the truth, eh? Oh, oh, guess not.

[delayjf]

and went back and forth several times like a messenger boy. Extraordinary for an American President.

Why didn't he do that with the PLO and Israel ?

[JustRalph]

Sadat might still be alive if Jimmy the Mouth hadn't talked him into putting himself at risk............this is what Sadat got for listening to Carter.......

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t790/T790569A.jpg

[Light]

The reason Sadat got nailed is not because he made peace with Carter and Israel,but because he didnt include the Palestinian issue as a prerequisite to any peace agreements.

Of course Rabin was assasinated in 95 by an Israeli fanatic for attempting peace with the PLO.

[philsfan07]

Thats impossible. It is in the interest of the righties who have controlled this country to withold damaging factual information. And it is in the interest of the Left to disclose that damaging factual information.

Yeah, Sandy Berger is a great tesitiment to that theory..

[Light]

light, what fantasy world do you live in? The mainstream media has been controlled by the left for years.

Bull. The media coverage of Iraq and 911 is more controlled today by the Whitehouse than the Vietnam war era ever was.

One big reason for all the deaths of firemen and policemen after 911 is because the Whitehouse told the EPA what to say to the media even though it wasnt the truth. They wanted Wall street opened up and to look like we were bouncing right back from the attack when in reality the whole place was a toxic tonic that took more lives.

Same thing with the Iraq war. The media is controlled by what it can say about the war by the Whitehouse.

Do you see carnage from the Iraq war on TV like you used to see with Vietnam. Whitehouse learned their lesson from the 60's and 70's. Censorship and controlled news leakage is the order today. And the press has obliged.

[Lefty]

light, if the mainstream media was controlled by the WH in any way they would be screaming censorship top of their lungs. The way they have reported the war is controlled in such a way as to make it unpopular wth the pipples just like Vietnam was. You clearly only see and hear what you want to.
light, and i'm still waiting for real examples not just opinions.
Here's one: The media pushed Kerry and would not even interview the swiftboat vets. I'm talking the big ones like ABC, NBC CBS, aka the mainstream media. The NY TIMES outted the secret plans of the WH more than once. Some control, eh?

[Secretariat]

Lefty,

You're just flat out wrong. Right wing newsman Rupert Murdoch was made a citzizen by Congressional manadate. The Post, FOX, all were pushed by a Republican congress that wanted a right wing agenda in the news. THe Wall Street Journal is right wing. Most TV stations are owned by corporations that are conservative. In fact GE has defense contracts and owns NBC. Disney owns ABC and is very conservative. Even the NY Times has Judith Miller who is a strong conservative as well as Safire. The Post has George Will among others.

Knoght Ridder is a legit news agency, but please c'mon Lefty the news media is generally to the right. Watch the news shows some Sunday, and look at the barrage of right wing pundints, and guests. Rarely will you ever see a Progressive. But plenty of conservatives.

No Lefty. You "think" the media is liberal because that's what conservatives want you to think. They feed you that, and you sop it up. If you'd really like to read some progressive liberal articles, let me know and I'll advise you of some periodicals to read. But don't make the mistake you think the news you see on TV is in any which way liberal.

[Snag]

Thats impossible. It is in the interest of the righties who have controlled this country to withold damaging factual information. And it is in the interest of the Left to disclose that damaging factual information.

Care to tell us what "interest" you refer to?

[Lefty]

sec, I think the, no, I know the mainstream media is liberal because I was subjected to it for yrs. Thank God for talk radio. And then Fox where I can see both sides debated fairly and squarely. You can't sell that sick claimer to me, bud. But where's the examples? Maybe you have some, light hasn't came up with any.

[46zilzal]

sec, I think the, no, I know the mainstream media is liberal because I was subjected to it for yrs. Thank God for talk radio and Fox where I can see both sides debated fairly and squarely. You can't sell that sick claimer to me, bud.
Fox is about as fair and balanced as a mother watching her kids compete in a swimming meet.

[Lefty]

46, guess you don't watch it. They always provide rightwingers and leftwingers when debating a subject; never just one side as does the mainstream. You libs hate Fox for that, you prefer to hear just your dimlib side.

[46zilzal]

I don't hate anything as funny as Fox!!! A dumbed down version of the news, mixed with their paranoia, is great comic relief.

[Lefty]

so, light, se and zilly, some examples please. I started it out with a couple. Now it's your turn.

[46zilzal]

Easy, study of U. of Maryland.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1020-11.htm

[GaryG]

Easy, study of U. of Maryland.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1020-11.htm A tryly credible source. This from their "about us" page: 'CommonDreams.org is a "must" in my life and work'
Bill Moyers
That tells me all I need to know....you can surely do better than that....how about the Berkeley Barb?

[Lefty]

Please, zilly, just some examples from your own observation not from some leftwing group. I gave examples from my own observations, can't you do the same?
When 80+ pct of mainstream journalists, tv and newspaper, report they are registered dems and vote dem, they can't help themselves from slanting left.
Here's another example. When I watched the 2000 election results, when she thght Bush had won, Katie Couric ripped off her mike and stormed off the set.
That's objective?
When Bernie Goldburgh said the flat tax report that CBS gave several yrs ago was biased he was fired a short time later.
Zilly, btw, Fox has loads of Democrats working for them. Don't think the mainstream has man R's.

[Lefty]

Bill Moyers' sits on one of Geo. Soros' boards. Soros funds many leftwing groups. That's a credible source? Zilly, just some observations of your own? U can do it, or can you?

[lsbets]

Lefty,

You're just flat out wrong. Right wing newsman Rupert Murdoch was made a citzizen by Congressional manadate. The Post, FOX, all were pushed by a Republican congress that wanted a right wing agenda in the news. THe Wall Street Journal is right wing. Most TV stations are owned by corporations that are conservative. In fact GE has defense contracts and owns NBC. Disney owns ABC and is very conservative. Even the NY Times has Judith Miller who is a strong conservative as well as Safire. The Post has George Will among others.

Knoght Ridder is a legit news agency, but please c'mon Lefty the news media is generally to the right. Watch the news shows some Sunday, and look at the barrage of right wing pundints, and guests. Rarely will you ever see a Progressive. But plenty of conservatives.

No Lefty. You "think" the media is liberal because that's what conservatives want you to think. They feed you that, and you sop it up. If you'd really like to read some progressive liberal articles, let me know and I'll advise you of some periodicals to read. But don't make the mistake you think the news you see on TV is in any which way liberal.

I nominate this for the most delusional, uninformed, agenda driven post of all time!

[Tom]

Still waiting for ljb or 46 to provide ONE example of hat they accuse Fox or Rush of....NEVER seen it, never will. At least I watch the left wing shows before I accuse them of thing. And if you take my numbers away, Randi Rhodes. Sleezxy Stephanie Miller, Knucklehead Ed Schultz would all drop in the ratings.:lol:

Small people keep accusing people of things and never offering any example.
Hear that, 46 and ljb?

[Tom]

Light makes a few true points. Viet Nam had virtually NO censorship. I have complained about that for this war since near the beginning. As a citizen, who is allowing my elected officials to send out children into battle, I have an obligation to see the real truth. We all do. The media has no balls. In the 60's and 70's, they did not let the government scare them. They got the stories and they got them out there. The media of today is more concerned with breaking on time for a commercial. That is the universal truth about the press. It is green.

And I also bithced out Bush for his LYING about the air quyality in NYC - an inexcusable and reprehensible act. Light, another reason Bush should be impeached but the leftys are to incompetant to act on reality. He should be charged with at least manslaughter for that one.

[Light]

so, light, se and zilly, some examples please. I started it out with a couple. Now it's your turn.

What the hell you babbling about? I just gave you 2 concrete examples of media truth suppression by the right wing WH with 911 and the Iraq war. They led to concrete deaths. What more you want? Links? You got em.Face it Lefty. Your government lies to your face.

On order of the White House, the US Environmental Protection Agency concealed atmospheric dangers around Ground Zero. Tens of thousands of persons will die a slow, agonizing death.

The White House manipulated the reports of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [5] about the air quality in the environment of Ground Zero after the attacks [6] and thus exposed all the relief workers, residents and employees in south Manhattan to extreme health risks [7]. In the meantime, 15,000 already show symptoms of this sickness. The first persons have already died [8]. According to some estimates [9], 30,000 to 50,000 persons may have been affected.

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/08/344173.shtml

no press releases could be issued from the EPA without clearance from the National Security Council, via the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The CEQ deleted instructions to the public to obtain professional asbestos cleaning for indoor spaces, and “discouraged” the EPA from discussing the “health risk to ‘sensitive populations.’”

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3020

Is this the kind of government you believe in?

[Lefty]

light you said the WH controlled the media, meaning censorship. These examples prove nothing as this news was reported, otherwise we wouldn't know about it, would we. NY TIMES ran 50+ frontpage stories about Abu Graib. Some control by the WH, huh? They don't run many about the tortuers in the middle east but they sure rag on this admin. Where's the friggin control?

[wonatthewire1]

Light makes a few true points. Viet Nam had virtually NO censorship. I have complained about that for this war since near the beginning. As a citizen, who is allowing my elected officials to send out children into battle, I have an obligation to see the real truth. We all do. The media has no balls. In the 60's and 70's, they did not let the government scare them. They got the stories and they got them out there. The media of today is more concerned with breaking on time for a commercial. That is the universal truth about the press. It is green.

And I also bithced out Bush for his LYING about the air quyality in NYC - an inexcusable and reprehensible act. Light, another reason Bush should be impeached but the leftys are to incompetant to act on reality. He should be charged with at least manslaughter for that one.


Since Lsbets nominated the other post, I'm going to nominate this one for nailing a few things on the head....and we ain't gonna get that nail out.

[Tom]

Unklike some of the resident libs, I take no joy in the truth. I am not looking for Bush=Bad things to post. I will not carry his water, though.
Some here probably do cart-wheels over bad news for America. The real Sickos.