Jimmy Carter, the enigma.

Think I read somewhere he was Hunter S thompson favorite president which is good enough for me!

and wasnt he the only president not to start a war ?

In the uk we had Callaghan's government at the same time with similar problems.

think they both just had a bad time of it, neither will prob be rememberd in the long run, right men for the wrong time!

Originally posted by intrepid...The country was healing from a long war(Viet Nam) that pitted one against the other. A war also lost.

What is your definition of "lost"??

The USA lost around 58,000 + troops
North Vietnam lost around 1,000,000 + troops

The USA killed way more of the enemy therefore, that is a "win".

Moreover, the war in Vietnam was not started by Nixon, rather, the troop presence in Vietnam started under Truman (democrat), and increased under Eisenhower (republican), continued under Kennedy (democrat) and Johnson (democrat) and finally ended under Nixon (republican). The purpose of the "war" in Vietnam was to stop the communists from taking over another country - the same reason for the presence in South Korea earlier.

While many outside of the US, as you stated, believe Carter to have been a good president, I can tell you that he is a Globalist, New World Order, Trilateralist and is despised for his erosion of America's sovereignty.

Additionally, Carter was president during a period that saw the escalation of interest rates in America, gas shortages, increased unemployment rates, decreasing military strength, which left a bad taste in the mouth of most Americans.

Carter failed to consult either the Pentagon or the Kremlin before removing U.S. missiles from South Korea within hours of his inauguration, a move Brezhnev interpreted as weakness rather than conciliation. In 1979, Brezhnev refused to remove Soviet submarines and aircraft from Cuba.

He cut off aid to El Salvador, which was fighting a Communist insurgency, but gave more than $90 million in aid to the Nicaraguan Sandinistas. He soon halted diplomatic recognition of our allies on Taiwan and recognized Beijing in their place.

Perhaps most egregious, was his surrendering of the Panama Canal.

These are a few of the things the so-called "great mediator" Carter did to destroy America, and engraciate himself with his CFR/TC/NWO masters.


[edit on 11-10-2007 by ar71015]

Jimmy Carter…double digit inflation, interest rates, unemployment!
America was (correctly) perceived as having a weak leader that appeased rather than confronted dictators and despots…
And the Panama Cannel…let’s no even go their!
All tolled, his was the most failed American presidency in the countries history…
Little wonder those in the world that wish America ill Cheered Jimmy Carter…The Best man on their team!

I'm English born and raised, now living in the USA. I believe that Carter was a great president.

He was blamed for too much, and credited with too little.

I can see why the powers that be would not want another Carter in the halls of power. It's is better to discredit his presidency as a 'warning' to those who might just consider maybe voting for someone like him in the future.

All props to Jimmy, especially as he admitted seeing a UFO.

Originally posted by tegidfoel
Jimmy Carter…double digit inflation, interest rates, unemployment!
America was (correctly) perceived as having a weak leader that appeased rather than confronted dictators and despots…
And the Panama Cannel…let’s no even go their!
All tolled, his was the most failed American presidency in the countries history…
Little wonder those in the world that wish America ill Cheered Jimmy Carter…The Best man on their team!

This is exactly the real Jimmy Carter. Never have I had the lack of respect for any American leader like I have for Jimmy. Why most non US citizens respect him or his legacy is beyond me. Definately the worst Leader we've ever had

reply to post by dakota1s2



Well he got you to speak up and post. That is a good thing.

But I disagree with your premise, but agree with your right to have it. If you read around a bit, you will see the reasons that some do not consider the more, let us say, Imperialistic presidents as better then Carter.

Many of the criticisms of him depend on which set of glasses you view them through. He probably did not put material expansion of corporate interest very high up on the list of American priorities.

reply to post by intrepid


Jimmy Carter appears to be a good human being and was a decent president, Iranian Hostages or not. However, just because he seems to smell like a rose, especially after his presidency, as compared to the rotting lot that have also occupied the Oval Office, does not make him perfect or a saint.

If he made it to the presidency, then there must be some dirt on him, somewhere. The oligarchy doesn't let just anyone run the U.S. and they've been well entrenched for a very long time. Since I don't believe America is a democracy or that the "free will" of the people has any say in the electoral process, then I am suspect of any politician.

I sense that Carter is a kind, caring and wise soul who has done far more good on this planet than most politicians. Besides, he looks similar to my grandfather, who died several years ago on Christmas Eve.

However, like Ron Paul, just because it walks, talks and acts like the perfect antithesis to what ails Washington D.C., does not make it so, Captian Picard. If Ron Paul is so great, then why did he wait until this year to sound off? If Ron Paul is the answer - and They killed John F. Kennedy - then why is he being allowed to whack the political hornet's nest like Ross Perot's "voodoo economics."

Listen, if it waddles around the Beltway, I don't trust it. As for Mr. Carter, I'd help him build a home for someone, but until I really got to know him, I wouldn't trust him anymore than I would trust another politician who - if a good man when he goes into the machine - can't help but be tainted by playing ball with the likes we've seen in my lifetime, alone.

I have much doubt about most men's ability to have a change of heart. Few people transform and fewer, still, can walk the straight and narrow path without falling into the abyss of ego.

Of course, I'm a cynic and a skeptic. Like any other "shepherd" to the masses - Alex Jones is one example - I wonder why they're allowed to speak their mind and live, when others have died and we know that the Cabal plays for keeps. So, is it disinformation? Misdirection? A well-orchestrated tool? Smoke and mirrors? When the world bankers control both sides of the issue, then their man wins, everytime.

Hmm, could we be winning?

I would keep looking for marionette strings on every media or political puppet, ex-president or not. Even Cheney has probably smiled and given candy to a kid. I would take Carter over Cheney, anyday. It's the lesser of two evils theory and The Powers That Be play that game better than any of us, because they don't care about we, the little people.

Carter seems to care, which only makes me wonder why he isn't dead, yet. Besides, until millions of people are getting into the Establishment's face like Carter appears to be doing, it won't matter one iota. And the Cabal knows this and flaunts it. They feel that secure in their power, now, if not for quite some time.

Those who want Gore to run for the presidency, again, don't see that he is not the answer, either. I believe the whole political machine needs to be broken apart by the people and rebuilt in our image. It's time for another revolution.

There is a small glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel, which could be the lethargic, apathetic and ignorant beast of the people slowly rising from slumber. If it awakens, soon, then there may be a chance that the revolution will not be bloody. However, should it keep hitting snooze, then we are doomed.

Can you spell fascism?

namaste

My mom voted for Jimmy Carter, and from me reading about him, he seems like a great guy.

Well, got nothing more to add for the time being.

reply to post by intrepid


some old folks dont realize that they have gotten old and that its time to retire-----israel has a president peres that is the jewish twin of jimmy carter------they both appear to have dementia and senility-------i say this without being hatefull------its just plainwell a fact that is what happens to old folks-----i should know----i'm fighting it myself-----i go down the basement with the intentions of getting something and by the time i get there i wonder what i'm doing in the basement----its sad.the psychiatrists that should be keeping an eye on government employees are doing a poor job by not getting some old politicians carted off for their own good and ours.

Carter was a poor President overall. Name one thing other than Camp David and SALT II that was good. He took over at a bad time in American Politics and made it worse with policy blunders all over the place. How anyone can look back at the time period fondly is beyond me. The Hostage Crisis just sealed his already doomed presidency.

His main "sin" as a President was to not be the Decisive, Optimistic Leader most Americans want in a Prez. He is the only President in Modern times to request that his whole cabinet turn in their resignations. Indecisive would be the main word I would use to describe him. He was never sure of himself and the country as a whole.

I contrast him to Reagan and his "Pony in the barn" story. Reagan kept shoveling the the horse droppings beacuse he knew there was a pony in there somewhere, Carter would just complain about the piles of manure and how we couldn't do anything with it.

Originally posted by pavil
He is the only President in Modern times to request that his whole cabinet turn in their resignations. Indecisive would be the main word I would use to describe him.

Sounds pretty decisive to me! Dude obviously knew what was going on behind his back.

I'm really glad we have such a "decisive" leader now. He/they are pretty decisive in the things they choose to FUBAR.

Peace

Carter's big sin that the public could never forgive is that he tried to be honest with them.

Americans don't want the truth, they want to feel good and justified.

Talk radio and faux news are proof enough of that.

Originally posted by ar71015
The USA lost around 58,000 + troops
North Vietnam lost around 1,000,000 + troops

The USA killed way more of the enemy therefore, that is a "win".

I find it sad that you define winning by how many die. I guess a good old nuking of an unarmed country would be a major victory in your book.

But anyway, the comments about his actions come from a point of view that the US should do anything anywhere to support its corporate interest abroad. Something that does not help, nor is completely supported by many Americans.

When he showed weakness to the USSR, as you said his actions were, the USSR might have felt they could invade Afghanistan. That warmongering invasion led to the fall of the hard right in USSR. His actions not to escalate may have helped many in the soviet union find a slightly better form of government.

Horrible economy, extremely weak foreign policy, plus he's stuck his nose into politics far too much as an ex-president.

I wasn't really aware that foreigners liked Carter, I though Clinton was their boy. Anyway, if it's true it's probably because they like to see a weaker America.

[edit on 10/11/2007 by djohnsto77]

Well, what would you call it?

In sports, when one team scores more points than the other team, they're the winner. Right?

In war, the country that kills more soldiers is the winner. Despite the propaganda perpetuated in the mainstream media. The US was asked, following France's inability, to keep Vietnam safe from the growing red menace. The US did what was asked. The only "loss" that can be realized in Vietnam and Korea, would be their respective governments making nice with their northern/communist neighbors.

As far as the Fall of the USSR - communism did not die when the USSR fell. As a matter of fact, communism is not only alive in America, but its power is growing.

Originally posted by Redge777

Originally posted by ar71015
The USA lost around 58,000 + troops
North Vietnam lost around 1,000,000 + troops

The USA killed way more of the enemy therefore, that is a "win".

I find it sad that you define winning by how many die. I guess a good old nuking of an unarmed country would be a major victory in your book.

Originally posted by Dr Love

Originally posted by pavil
He is the only President in Modern times to request that his whole cabinet turn in their resignations. Indecisive would be the main word I would use to describe him.

Sounds pretty decisive to me!

Dude obviously knew what was going on behind his back.

Uhhhh in a word NO. You wait three years into your four year term to decide that you want to basically fire your cabinet, all of whom you personally selected as the most qualified for the positions. Great leadership and managerial skills there buddy. That you look at that as a positive frightens me as much.

Plus, he only wanted to get rid of five of them. The man could not make up his mind and the country paid the price for his lack of vision.

Originally posted by carewemust

He is a good man who would have served 2 terms if his hostage rescue
mission didn't crash and burn in the desert. (IMO) -cwm

And why did that rescue mission fail? You all seem to be forgetting that another of Carter's great moves post-Viet Nam war was to basically gut the U.S. military. Gut it to the point where they were unable to sucessfully carry out a mission (any mission?) like the hostage rescue.

Yes, I remember Carter as a president that anything he touched turned to crap. I remember the gas lines and rationing. I remember interest rates headed towards 20%. I remember he and his staff rolling beer cans down the aisle of Air Force One. I remember his brother Billy pissing off of the roof of a government building (State Department?) in Washington DC. I remember Carter telling Playboy magazine that he "lusted in his heart" after other women. In short, everything seemed to be in a mess and Carter and his group of cronies hardly seemed to have the "presidential image" that Americans of that time were looking for.

Now I see Carter doing his own "diplomacy" - the rest of the US be damned. I seem him as the first ex-president to break the protocol by being openly critical of successor presidents instead of serving as a behind the scenes advisor. Clinton has now started doing this as well, but you can not find any other prior presidents doing this. I see Carter's north korean "diplomacy" - the one that allowed them to get aid and still build nuclear weapons.

A previous poster tried to say that everything bad that happened during Carter's presidency was not his fault. Hypocrisy test coming up, but does either Bush get the same kind of "pass" now days? Answer = no. Example: all the people that blame Bush II for 9/11 instead of correctly placing the blame on clinton's carter-like failure to act.

Oh and to the other foreign poster that said he liked dems and not Republicans, LBJ was a democrat, not a Republican - and quite possibly the crookedest president we've ever had.

To me, Karter is at best a senile old fool being given a softer rewrite of history to make him look better than he is/was. Something similar has happened for Kennedy with his womanizing and the bay of pigs invasion being overlooked as a sign that he was also not the "saint" (solely because he was young and had a pretty wife?) history tries to portray him as today.

[edit on 10/11/2007 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by pavil
Uhhhh in a word NO. You wait three years into your four year term to decide that you want to basically fire your cabinet, all of whom you personally selected as the most qualified for the positions.

Snakes in the grass aren't always easy to see. Who knows, he may have picked them for their qualifications solely, which in reality is the right thing to do, a bit naive yes, but at least it's honest. Obviously their allegiances laid elsewhere.

Originally posted by pavil
Plus, he only wanted to get rid of five of them.

Thanks for clarifying "all" to just "5". "Simple" mistake. I understand.

Peace

[edit on 11-10-2007 by Dr Love]

In my opinion, Jimmy Carter is a solid candidate to be named the worst U.S. President of the 20th century.

[edit on 10/11/2007 by TheAvenger]

His grain embargo against the Soviet Union was a big mistake. The Soviets went to Argentina and got all they needed while the small American farmers went under. This was the decade the small farmer went out of business and many family farms were ruined.