Blogcasting from the worldwide headquarters of the not-so-vast gay right wing conspiracy.
Representing the millions of patriotic gays and lesbians across the USA by standing up for freedom, fairness, free speech, privacy and true American values.
GayPatriot is the internet home for American gay conservatives and hailed as "the most reliably conservative gay blog on the Internet."
"Terrific blog" -- Michael Barone, principal coauthor of The Almanac of American Politics.
FOLLOW GAY PATRIOT ON TWITTER!
Bruce Carroll Jr.(GayPatriot)
- Email: bruce -at- gaypatriot.org
B. Daniel Blatt (GayPatriotWest)
- Email: GayPatriotWest -at- aol.com
Sarjex Muller
- Email: Sarjex -at- gmail.com
Nick (ColoradoPatriot)
- Email: ColoradoPatriot -at- gmail.com
John (Average Gay Joe)
- Email: avgayjoe -at- yahoo.com
Vera Charles
JIMMY CARTER’S RACE PROBLEM. And then there’s his more recent anti-semitiism problem. He’s a foul old man, and a disgrace to the office he once held.
It seems to me that President Carter has earned his place as if not the worst president in history, the worst president of the 20th Century.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Yet it is a toss up between Obummer and Carter as to which one is really the worst.
Piece of information showing more about the Obummer lies. This one relates to his mother. Now she is in fact quite intelligent and earned her degrees in anthropology… so I take nothing away from Stanley Ann Dunham…. however, it seems that the ONE used his mother’s cancer and death for his own ends…
One of the many reasons that Obummer has given for his push for this horrendous piece of garbage that he is trying to enslave the people of USA is that when his mother was diagnosed with cancer she was between funds… and could not afford health insurance…. The truth is that his mother was in Indonesia when she started to have severe cramps… the hospital misdiagnosed her condition… she then flew to New York to the Kettering hospital….. seems she did not have trouble meeting the expenses of that visit…
So once again, Obummer lied about an anecdote…. no wonder people are so suspicious of his motivations when he uses family members in that way… I think that there might be more to be revealed about when his grandmother actually died… it seems that one blogger is suggesting that granny actually died at least a week before the Presidential election, not the night before like it was announced…. so granny was abused by the ONE in death too…..
Comment by thestraightaussie — September 20, 2009 @ 6:25 am - September 20, 2009
Geez, is it so easy to forget Woodrow Wilson?!
Comment by DaveP. — September 20, 2009 @ 6:46 am - September 20, 2009
Jimmy Carter ended runaway inflation, made the world safer through Rose Garden diplomacy, created a stirring pride among the American People, nearly ended racism, gave direction and meaning to the UN, cured the common cold and taught us all how to turn sibling rivalry into a productive force to save humanity.
There. Now Tano doesn’t have to comment.
Comment by heliotrope — September 20, 2009 @ 7:45 am - September 20, 2009
I just saw a bumper sticker
Picture of Obama
“It takes a Carter to get a Reagan”
Comment by PatriotMom — September 20, 2009 @ 7:52 am - September 20, 2009
lol. i just read a poll of normal americans identifying Carter as the best president of the past 50 years by a large percentage.
george w. bushco, however, was found to be the WORST by a huge margin.
so, go on repugnants, keep trying to convince yourself. we all know that strategy’s worked for you in the past…keep lying long enough and some will actually believe it. pathetic. still.
it’s going to be a LONG, LONG decade for you repugnants.
Comment by buckeyenutlover — September 20, 2009 @ 10:44 am - September 20, 2009
bucknut-
Ah, but you forget. Harry Truman once held the place of George W and now Truman is seen as one of the last century’s best leaders.
Carter has never budged from his status as “nearly or the” worst.
And W is our recent memory. So using the Truman-Carter gauge — I’d say Jimmy is stuck and there’s a chance that W will move up.
The worse Obama gets, the worse the Carter’s legacy looks through our lens today; and the better George W. Bush will be viewed in comparison.
Comment by GayPatriot — September 20, 2009 @ 11:34 am - September 20, 2009
Hey heliotrope,
That was a pretty good beginning! Too bad your instinct to be a silly insulter overtook you – I thought you might actually show signs of intellectual life!
Yes, it is true – Carter was responsible for curing the economic ills that befell America throughout the seventies. He understood that ending inflation was the key to recovery, and so he appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed with just such a mandate. I recently saw Volcker on Charlie Rose show and he recounted how he apologized to Carter after the 80 election, for having cost him his reelect – by squeezing the economy in an effort to drive out inflation.
In the end of course, it took a lot longer to finish the job. The economy got even worse in 81-82 as the Volcker squeeze played out, but by 83-84, the economy had recovered. And then of course, all the dishonest opportunistic Republicans started their spin as to how Reagan had something to do with it all. Or even his insane tax policies….
Oddly, so many small government types also seem to ignore the fact that Carter was responsible for starting the wave of government deregulation that continued for a few decades. Carter deregulated the airlines, the trucking industry, railroads, and began the process in the energy sector.
On foreign policy, once again we see how the right is so blinded by bizarre hatred to not recognize this great man’s accomplishments. By driving the Camp David process, Carter managed to secure for Israel its first peace treaty with an Arab neighbor, the largest Arab military force that had fought three wars with Israel in the previous 20 years – a peace which has held for 30 years now. Probably amongst the single most important event in securing the continued existence of Israel.
Although I bet y’all dont appreciate this one, his negotiation of the Panama Canal Treaty was also a major accomplishment, and an important step in redefining American relations with Latin America.
He was, of course, an ineffective political leader – he totally lacked the style and PR skills of a Reagan, and this cost him dearly. He came from the conservative wing of the Democratic Party, and always tried to build from the center out – and sadly he lacked the purely political skills to manage that. Thus he inspired a revolt from the left – the Kennedy challenge that hurt him politically, and left him vulnerable to the opposition in the general election.
His post presidency of course, has been the greatest of any President. His work against tropical diseases alone puts him near the top of the list of people who have had the greatest real world impact in our lifetimes. His work in monitoring elections, and mentoring new democracies in the mechanisms of elections have had a hugely positive impact on making real, and sustaining the democratic dreams that he people in those countries had.
His perspective and opinions on political issues of the day have been a valuable contribution to global debates. Of course many are quite controversial – I agree with much he has to say, but certainly not all. I imagine that is the only way it could be. I do disagree with his latest statements about race.
A great man, who has made more concrete, real world contributions to the good of the world than almost anyone else alive today, and far more than the hack anklebiters whose criticisms you highlight
Comment by Tano — September 20, 2009 @ 11:38 am - September 20, 2009
#7: …and that concludes this week’s episode of “Wake Up, Palestine!” Thank you for watching. Now stay tuned for that lovable bunny Hasan and his blood-thirsty pals on another madcap episode of “Caliphate Street!” This week, tomorrow’s glorious martyrs will learn about the number 3, the letter W, and how to effectively drive a carving knife into the jugular vein of a Zionist oppressor. And tonight on Hamas TV, you won’t want to miss the season premiere of the hilarious hit comedy, “You Dirty, Dirty, Jew!”
Comment by Sean A — September 20, 2009 @ 1:31 pm - September 20, 2009
LOL…but of course, the intellectual hypocrite and liar shrieked that deregulation was evil.
And what makes this funny is that blabbering Tano and his leftists try to argue that Carter’s deregulation was good for reducing costs, since regulation increases them and ruins competition — but then insist that imposing even more regulation on the health care industry is going to lower costs.
Heliotrope nailed it. Tano is nothing but an Obama Party shill who is incapable of criticizing or disagreeing with anything the Obama Party says. If blabbering Tano REALLY disagreed with Jimmy Carter’s statements on race, he would criticize Jimmy Carter for making them and insist that that demonstrates that Jimmy Carter is an awful person.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — September 20, 2009 @ 3:35 pm - September 20, 2009
Tano, yes, grant that Carer did some good by beginning the process of deregulation, interesting (and surprisingly) with the help of the late Senator Kennedy.
As to his foreign policy, go study your history. It was absolutely disastrous. Carter had absolutely nothing to do with the invitation the Israelis extended to Sadat to come to Israel nor with the preliminary negotiations. His incompetence prevented a transition from dictatorship to democracy in Nicaragua and strengthened the hands of Islamic extremists by his erratic dealings with our then-ally in Tehran. Had he not gone public with his criticisms of the Shah, but instead worked behind the scenes to pressure him to reform his regime, he might have helped allow a constitutional monarchy to flourish there instead of Islamic tyranny.
Valuable contribution to global debates? What? Only those on the far left take him seriously and while leaders of tyrannical regimes may welcome him into their capitals, his (purported) pleas for greater democratization fall on deaf ears. Well, not quite deaf ears. They pretend to listen and act exactly as they had before.
And recall his commitment to human rights while he was President? What has happened to that now?
Please name a nation which has moved from tyranny to democracy thanks to Mr. Carter’s work. Yeah, he may have done some good work with Habitat for Humanity, but what real world contributions (beyond that) has he made?
Oh and let’s not forget the irregularities he ignored when he was down in Venezuela supervising the “recall” election of Hugo Chavez. Had he called foul on that fraudulent process, we might have one fewer despot in the Western hemisphere, one less worry for U.S. foreign policy.
Your defense of this incompetent, self-serving many is like the skills you ascribe to the Gipper, rhetoric mere rhetoric, PR without substance.
So, please study your history and not its misrepresentations on left-wing blogs (like this one) before chiming in.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — September 20, 2009 @ 3:40 pm - September 20, 2009
I’m a lifelong Democrat, and the only two Democratic candidates I didn’t vote for were Carter and Obama. I was right.
Comment by Ashpenaz — September 20, 2009 @ 4:09 pm - September 20, 2009
Oh Daniel. First, thanks for not being a psycho like some of your regular commenters. But your rewriting of history is downright bizarre.
“Carter had absolutely nothing to do with the invitation the Israelis extended to Sadat to come to Israel nor with the preliminary negotiations.”
What do you think that proves? No one is claiming tha Carter literally picked Begin and Sadat up and forced them kicking and screaming to the table. No, he played, masterfully, the role of mediator, prodder, facilitator, enabler of the process. You know, that great ideal of the good-faith mediator that all American administrations aspired to until the Bush administration.
“His incompetence prevented a transition from dictatorship to democracy in Nicaragua”
Now that is downright hilarious. There was a popular rebellion against a long-time American client dictator. That revolutionary movement set up a democracy. Although Ronald Reagan then spent many gruesomely shameful years undermining that democracy by supporting armed thugs and death squads, in the end, the democratic government proved its bona fides in the most clear-cut manner. They held a free and fair election, they lost the election, and they peacefully turned over power to the opposition. It is a democracy that persists to this day. That you probably detest their actual policies, and I was no big fan either, is besides the point. They had the overwhelming support of the people, and when they lost it, they exited the stage without a fight.
“strengthened the hands of Islamic extremists by his erratic dealings with our then-ally in Tehran”
Once again – what planet? Our ally was a dictator, that we had installed after overthowing the Iranian democracy in the fifties. An Iranian Saddam. There was a popular revolution that had the overwhelming support of the Iranian people. The alternative for Carter was what? Interfere again and crush the popular movement? Insane.
Surprisingly, I dont sense you are comparing Carter to his successor – someone who actually sold weapons to the Islamist extremist government, in direct violation of US law – and somehow managed to escape impeachment by playing dumb about it.
“Had he not gone public with his criticisms of the Shah, but instead worked behind the scenes to pressure him to reform his regime, he might have helped allow a constitutional monarchy to flourish there”
Absolute ahistorical fantasy.
‘Only those on the far left take him seriously”
No, rather that is ‘only on the far right in America’ is he not taken seriously, just as the far right tries to demonize anyone who they disagree with. He is an enormously well-respected figure around the world.
As for the election work, I dont have the time to discuss them all. Here is a link to get you started on actual, real world information, rather than just bloviating talking points. LINK
Comment by Tano — September 20, 2009 @ 4:20 pm - September 20, 2009
Tano, let me guess, you’re either in college–or just graduated–and studied history under some left-wing professor.
No, Carter did not take Begin and Sadat kicking and screaming to the table. He just prodded them along once they were there.
As to Nicaragua, no, the revolutionary movement did not set up a democracy. The only free election Ortegas won was the most recent putting him in power–and even then he didn’t win a majority of the popular vote. It was because of the contras (no, not armed thugs and death squads) that Ortega agreed to the free elecitons that ousted him.
Yep, the popular revolution had the support of the Iranian people. But, go back and study Carter’s policies which were indeed erratic, first criticiing the shah, then cozying up to him, calling him “an island of stability.” Had he nudge the shah to move to democracy, he might have helped him forestall the “revolution” that Khomeini and his radical allies undermined to their own Islamicist ends
Carter? Well-respected? You’re kidding me? Only in Jimmy Carter’s mind is he respected. Sorry, a link to the Carter center to show his accomplishments is like a link to the web-page of the Iranian government to show the legitimacy of their recent elections.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — September 20, 2009 @ 4:31 pm - September 20, 2009
No Daniel,
I do see though that you are a typical rightwinger when it comes to argumentation – try to find something to hang an insult on – thats about the size of it.
Actually I am old enough to have lived through, and thought through and followed politics from long before the Carter administration came to power. I voted for him twice in general elections, against him in primaries.
“…the revolutionary movement did not set up a democracy. The only free election Ortegas won was the most recent putting him in power–…Ortega agreed to the free elecitons that ousted him.”
HUh? Yes, as I said, the Sandanistas won one election, then lost the next – and left power. So how does that NOT equate to setting up a democracy?
The latter election was mandated by the Constitution – it was not held in response to the Contra thugs – who then went on to assasinate 50 Sandanista candidates.
“Had he nudge the shah to move to democracy, he might have helped him forestall the “revolution” ‘
Daniel, what on earth makes you think that the Shah was going to be “nudged” into giving up power? Seriously, what planet do you live on? Dictators dont give up power because they get a nudge from the other side of the world, even if it is their former patron.
“a link to the Carter center to show his accomplishments is like a link to the web-page of the Iranian government to show the legitimacy of their recent elections.”
ITs not a list of his accomplishments, its a list of the ongoing work of his center in the field of democracy promotion, something you clearly are ignorant of. And your comparison is obscene. I guess you are the type of person who will say anything, no matter how absurd, in pursuit of a good partisan insult. Shame on you.
Comment by Tano — September 20, 2009 @ 4:46 pm - September 20, 2009
Tano, I have tried to show you respect even as you continue to insult me. I may fault you for not reading my posts, but until the last comment, didn’t address the issue of your age. Perhaps, I shouldn’t have.
The Sandinistas won no free elections, at least not until this century–and this with far less than a majority. Please check the history. Perhaps they held elections as the Cubans do to this day (and as Communist countries did at that time) when the FMLN overthrew Somoza. Ortega was forced into holding the 1990 election which ousted him. (Again, check the history.)
Um, dictators don’t give up power. Hmmm. . . hmm . . . . better go read Jeane Kirpatrick’s essay DIctatorships & Double Standards (which I’m delighted to discover is available on the web) and get back to me on that. She didn’t mention a Mr. Pinochet in Chile who gave him his dictatorship about a decade after she wrote that celebrated essay (which drew her to the attention of Ronald the Great).
Wow, Tano, you really do reserve your insults for the end. I just don’t see Jimmy Carter’s Center as a reliable source for information on Jimmy Carter, given that if you follow this link in my post above, you’ll see how the failed former President misrepresents his record.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — September 20, 2009 @ 5:10 pm - September 20, 2009
Wow. Just wow. A Democrat that even John McCain doesn’t want to reach out to.
Comment by SoCalRobert — September 20, 2009 @ 6:19 pm - September 20, 2009
Wow. A link to NRO – specialists in gutter politics vs Carter. And they dredge out a supposed quote from 1956!!!! Wow.
Carter has quite the history in Georgia, and on a national level, for well over 30 years. His views on racial matters is rather unambiguous. He was aligned with Dr. king’s heirs, like Andy Young, who were his closest associates. Dr King’s father played a major role in helping Carter get the nomination – something he did because of his view that Carter was instrumental in leading Georgia out of segregation.
I imagine that it is precisely the fact that he grew up in the segregated south, and made for himself a political career being one of the shepards of leading the old south into the new south that led him to overestimate the racial component (which certianly is present to some extent) in the present situation.
So no. It is you and NRO that is misrepresenting his record. Facts are a difficult thing for an ideologue determined to engage in character assasination.
Comment by Tano — September 20, 2009 @ 6:36 pm - September 20, 2009
Wow are these guys really defending and proping up Carter as a great President? Geez, guess that explains a lot. Standards….standards anyone on the left have any standards?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 20, 2009 @ 7:28 pm - September 20, 2009
Carter gave us 18% interest rates, (21% credit card rates,) 14% inflation (people were running to grocery stores back then to beat the lady with the clicker gun who was raising prices), and 9% unemployment (historically high until Obamas depression came about). A misery rate of 41%! Staggering numbers. Bush 43’s misery rate compares at 5% interest rates, 2% inflation and 6% unemployment =13%. Carters economy was so staggering bad it’s hard to comprehend. Yet the liberal Democrats here defend him! Wow. Guess it says a lot about their credibility. huh.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 20, 2009 @ 7:33 pm - September 20, 2009
Domestically Carter was a nightmare. Internationally…..we had embassys attacked and hostages taken. Carter had gutted the military so badly that when Carter tried to launch a rescue attempt we had planes and helocopters running into each other in the desert, killing our troops. They had to withdraw and never made another attempt. The country was embarassed. Carter humiliated. But now 29 years later because of the inept public education system, liberal Democrats hold him up as a great President. Odd.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 20, 2009 @ 7:36 pm - September 20, 2009
These defenders of Carter are the same ones defending Obamateleprompter. Raise your standards a little guys. Or your words aren’t worth reading.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 20, 2009 @ 7:38 pm - September 20, 2009
Thank you for taking the time to take tano to task on the historical record.
Now as for the hystarical record…. The only thing Tano didn’t congratulate Carter on was his support of terrorists like Arafat.
Though to Carter’s credit, he didn’t sit on the same board with terrorists, or fund raise in the homes of terrorists.
Comment by The_Livewire — September 20, 2009 @ 8:40 pm - September 20, 2009
Tano,
I have been away all day at a conference, so I come late to responding to your history making claim that:
Carter alone understood that Nixon should have shunned Teddy Kennedy’s urging for wage and price controls. Of course, Kennedy was a closet Republican.
The Thoughts of Chairman Tano quotebook is beginning to get overwhelmed with immutable truths not yet understood by short-of-beyond-the-fringe people.
Comment by heliotrope — September 20, 2009 @ 9:11 pm - September 20, 2009
heliotrope,
Well I think Tano just conceeded that the tax cuts of President Bush are responsible for the illusion of recovery we’re in now, since he gives Carter credit for the Reagan recovery.
Comment by The_Livewire — September 21, 2009 @ 7:32 am - September 21, 2009
#5 The poll was about who was the best ex-president–who had done the best since leaving office. Check here:
http://www.drudge.com/news/125247/survey-carter-best-living-ex-president
That is very different from a poll about who was best president. Carter’s rank probably comes from his much publicized work with Habitat for Humanity.
Among its other accomplishments, the Carter administration gave the world Robert Mugabe as president of Zimbabwe. As an American I am deeply ashamed for what we did to the poor people of that country via the Carter Administration.
(Carter is probably the worst president of my lifetime, but he does not beat out Herbert Hoover as worst ever. And I think Obama has an excellent chance of beating Carter in the race to the bottom–he certainly is on track for that distinction.)
Comment by nohype — September 21, 2009 @ 5:06 pm - September 21, 2009