As sensible world leaders develop strategies to clean up the messes made by Jimmy Carter, both as president and ex-president, this classless ex-president uses the funeral of Coretta Scott King to attack (once again) the President of the United States. Perhaps the Islamist regime in Iran would not be developing nuclear weapons had then-President Carter acted responsibly in 1979 when thugs backed by the fledgling government there broke international law and seized American diplomats, holding them hostage until Ronald Reagan took office.
The North Korean regime may have fallen had Carter in 1994 not gone there to negotiate a deal on nuclear weapons against the wishes of the elected Democratic president of the United States and his Administration. As the world confronts the reality of these tyrannies armed with nuclear weapons, Jimmy Carter, quite possibly the worst president in U.S. history and almost certainly the most classless ex-president, has joined his pal Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan and others on the fringes of political discourse, in blaming everything on President Bush. In his vitriolic attacks on President Bush, he has departed from the policies of all previous ex-presidents while showing more contempt for President Bush than he does for America’s enemies.
Today, that contempt was on full display. He referenced the FBI’s wiretapping of Dr. King to take a swipe at President Bush. Carter claims that the president’s program to eavesdrop on the international communications of suspected terrorists violates the law (Via: Fullosseus Flap’s Dental Blog ). He brought up Hurricane Katrina to show “that all are not yet equal in America.”
Once again, this failed president used a public forum to bash the current president. As a sign of how classless this man is, he doesn’t limit his attacks to domestic fora, having also attacked the president abroad. He has put earning personal accolades ahead of the interests of the nation he was served in its highest elected office. As the Anchoress puts in her post on today’s activities:
any former president who will accept a “peace prize” given to him explicitly to (as the Nobel board admitted) “kick the current president in the pants” is unworthy of his office, or the esteem a former president is normally due.
At least we can thank Jimmy Carter for making it easier for Ronald Reagan to be elected in 1980. But, alas, that the Gipper only began to clean up the messes created by this sad and self-serving man. It is up to world leaders and President Bush – and likely to their successors as well – to deal with the legacy of Jimmy Carter’s failures.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
UPDATE: I agree with Gateway Pundit who writes that at today’s funeral, Democrats Prove Nothing is Sacred or Out of Bounds.
UP-UPDATE: Queer Conservative says that Jimmy Carter “gets loonier each time I hear him speak these days.” Guess that’s what happens when you keep company with Michael Moore.
UP-UP-UPDATE: Malcontent begs that “for the sake of decorum, decency and the memory of the dearly departed, please do not use my funeral as a platform to launch attacks on those with whom I disagreed politically.”
UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt thinks that those eager to send Jimmy Carter “ message that might get through his self-righteousness and deeply dishonest posturing about illegal wiretaps and Katrina victims” should make a contribution to the re-election campaign of Nevada Senator John Ensign. The failed president’s son Jack is running against this good Republican.
UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Calling Carter’s remarks the “one moment of true malice,” James Taranto at Best of the Web asks whether the ex-president really meant “to suggest that Robert F. Kennedy’s spying on Martin Luther King is the equivalent of the current administration spying on al Qaeda terrorists?”
UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: The New York Post called Mr. Carter’s performance the King funeral “disgraceful” and “reprehensible,” reminding its readers that “There was a time when former presidents did not publicly attack their successors, but that respect long ago went by the wayside as far as Carter, America’s national scold, is concerned.” (Via Tammy who has more.)
UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE:Like James Taranto above, Lee Harris is troubled by Carter’s comparison of Martin Luther King, Jr. to Osama bin Laden and his followers:
Suppose Osama bin Laden, like Dr. King, had struggled with all his might to keep his organization from turning to bloodshed and violence. Would Bush have felt the need to launch a domestic surveillance program on such a pacifistic movement? Maybe; maybe not. But the fact that al-Qaeda embraces violence and celebrates terrorism — doesn’t this small detail destroy the basis of Carter’s analogy?