It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 02:17 PM
Suffice it to say, over the past two and a half years, the fifth column of the leftist media have deliberately joined forces with Bill Clinton in a feeble attempt to resuscitate his despicable legacy. Now, another equally subversive ex-presidential mole, Jimmy Carter, has been ratcheting up his own sophomoric efforts to re-script his pathetic legacy.

Traditionally, former presidents have typically shown great respect toward sitting presidents by remaining silent about any criticism they may have wanted to direct at that administrationís foreign policy, especially on issues of national security. For instance, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan and Bush, Sr., to name a few, all respected one anotherís respective presidencies and even gave off-the-record advice, when asked.

posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 02:26 PM

This should have happened a long time ago.


posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 02:44 PM

Originally posted by xaos

This should have happened a long time ago.


I think I'll join them. Naw, i'm too conservative. Still, it's good to see Bush has some actual political enemies in this country.

posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 03:24 PM
LOL.. Carter hahahahahahahahahha. If you look up the word 'Tool' in the dictionary, there's ol' Jimmy's mug right staring right back at ya. The fact that he was awarded the Nobel Peace prize made me laugh so hard my sides hurt. If ever in the future, for some weird f#$ked up reason I was awarded the Peace prize, I would turn it down cause mama's boy won one. Clinton and Carter were the one's that escaladed this whole North Korean mess. HAHAHAHA Carter heeheehee.

posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 06:09 PM
Great...One ex-Pres from the farm that had the whole country working for peanuts & another who gave the shaft to the entire country, especially that Monica-chick...

posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 07:33 PM
despite all that has happened with these two. this is the best of example of the american dream! what exactly do they plan to do, slag him til the next election year? impeach him lol!

posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 09:16 PM
I'd have expected nothing less of Clinton; he's trailer trash from Arkansas and displays the couth and etiquette of such, but Carter! I really expected more presidential behavior from Carter. While I do not particularly like Carter, I expected discipline to be displayed by the Naval Acadamy graduate and Southern Gentleman. Hell, Billy Carter would've had better sense.

posted on Feb, 28 2003 @ 10:05 PM
Quite so on Slick Willy, TC. I am starting to wonder if Jimmy hasn't flipped. His trip to Cuba was risible and there is a strong tradition of alternative rationality in the family!
But dirty deeds by the Dems seems a more satisfactory explanation: try to stoke the fire with the old guys while they're desperately trying to find new guys.

posted on Mar, 5 2003 @ 12:37 PM
More blind hatred and falsehoods, huh Thomas & Nyeff!?!
I know we go round & round on Dim Son being incompetent, immoral & ill equipped for the job, but the slighting of two men based on their metered & cordial dissent, to what is so obviously poor performance, is reaching near hysterics on the Right.
People aren't suppose to notice the clusterf**k that is the Bush White House? Or make mention?
There is zero tradition of past Presidents taking the quite route; in fact, there has been much more harsh criticisms to outright name calling over the course of American history. Ask Observer, you should see the quotes! It's just a Right wing standard ploy to try and destroy the messenger.

And Thomas:
- Southern gentleman, not New england blue blood
- Built himself up from modest means, never given a company or a bankroll to start out with
- Accomplished something with his life when so many from his home state became 'trailer trash'
It seems you share much more with Bill than with the Usurper, no?

posted on Mar, 5 2003 @ 07:20 PM
Distinguished former presidents know that they should keep their yaps shut when concerning the sitting president. Have you become so out of touch with protocol that you can't fathom this? Shrub's crediblity, honesty and decency is way beyond that of Bill's, therefore he should not EVER say a darned thing, and Jimmy was a screw-up who's weakness put the country in peril, placed an asset of national security in the hands of the Chinese, well, I'm not going to sit here and bash the Tri-Lateralist, I'm just going to say that these guys should show the same courtesy they expected.

posted on Mar, 6 2003 @ 12:46 AM
Ex-President protocol be hanged, TC...If *current members* of Congress can speak out about Bush's blatent lies (as I've indicated by one of my later posts in the thread: ), why *not* Ex-Presidents? Why not the Citizens?
...Do you have something against the 1st Amendment, even degraded by the governmental & corporate interests as it *has been* for decades? Your indication of what "Ex-Presidential Protocol" should be like is another slap in the face of the 1st Amendment. Are you denying that even Ex-Presidents should not have the freedom to express their opinion? Even if they're only doing so in order to make some kind of a backing to rejuvenate their own political careers (or the career of someone else), they still have the Right to say it.

If you want to actually prove Clinton & Carter wrong, you'll have to find a way to research what their "true background motives" are...When you find out, be sure to let us know; And be sure to include your evidence...ATS is real *big* on people providing their sources...

IMO, which is backed up by what the Representative of Massachussetts said in the open, in front of the whole House of Representatives, Bush is a LIAR & a THIEF!
Don't take this as a personal defense for Clinton or Carter...They were just as bad or worse than Bush...As has been *every* President with the single exceptions of Lincoln & JFK.

[Edited on 6-3-2003 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Mar, 7 2003 @ 05:14 PM
that the shrub-ites defend this mental midget at every turn and discount the views of Rhodes scholars as the bantering of trailer trash & rednecks.

If you heard the shrub on TV the other night I'm sure you all heard the same thing that my son heard:

Daddy, did he really say "things would get worser?"

Even my 8 year old realizes that this bonehead should not be leading a class of 2nd graders, let alone the biggest democratic nation on the planet.

I say to Mr.Carter and Mr.Clinton: Criticize away my friends, since shrub truly does make it quite easy to do so.

Everyone, please register to vote and do so, since those who do not vote carry no right to criticize!!

[Edited on 7-3-2003 by USMC Harrier]

posted on Mar, 7 2003 @ 06:20 PM
I* wouldn't expect you, Harrier, to understand protocol, nor would I feel the need to debate with someone who is so smart as to say this man that has degrees from Ivy league schools and tests out as pretty darn smart, and has ran circles around the democrats, allowing them to box themselves in, as being a mental midget. Typical baseless attack the left loves to use.

Furthermore, protocol should not be damned, it should be observed so that the present president can conduct business without former presidents interfering. No, protocol should not be damned, but these to are seriously out of place and today's ignorant public aren't knowledgeable enough to know and the media isn't about to clue them in.

Don't throw parties for JFK, by the way. He started the real attacks against the U.S. with EO's and agreements with the U.N.

Lincoln, on the other hand, was a leader who had the country's best interests at heart, and that is why he got his brain scrambled.

posted on Mar, 8 2003 @ 12:45 AM
I included JFK because of what he was going to do *for* the country, but couldn't accomplish before getting killed...He was going to get us back on the gold-standard because he saw how the current economy would only lead to a downward spiral.

Granted, I don't consider JFK to be a saint...But what we need in leadership positions are saviors, not saints. Bush relies too much on his rep as a "born-again"...He *wants* to be a saint & damns anyone who gets in his way.

We *need* people who are in a position to point out things like this to the public...Even though Clinton & Carter may not be the best choices to do so, they still retain the Right of Speech to try. Perhaps they may *be* good choices to point out Bush's incompetence because it's a trait that is best *recognized* by others who *possess* those traits within themselves.

Yes, there *should* be certain "protocols" on this, just as the Freedom of Speech contains neccesary restrictions like not being able to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre...But those restrictions are there for public safety & to prevent incitements to rioting...
...But tacking protocols such as you've indicated onto people for speaking out against the current administration haven't been put there in the interests of public safety or to prevent incitements to rioting. You seem to indicate "protocols" that exist merely for the purpose of unneccesarily limitationing the Freedom of Speech.

BTW TC, I hope you're not taking any of this personally. I *like* debating with you on points that we don't have in common...Because you're keeping me on my toes & I'm hoping I do the same to you...

[Edited on 8-3-2003 by MidnightDStroyer]

top topics


log in