09-15-2006, 07:19 PM | #1 (permalink) | ||
Pissing in the cornflakes
|
Jimmy Carter working on weakening the USA
Most of you kids are too young to remember Carter, I'm old enough but barely.
The Hallmark of his presidency was the Iran hostage crisis, gas lines, double digit inflation, and his incompetence at dealing with just about any major issue. Anyways no need to harp on his presidency, he did his bit and gave us 12 years of Republican presidents. But I draw the line at this.... Quote:
He even admits he has no real knowledge of what is going on when he says Quote:
I think I agree with his mother ... Sometimes, when I look at my children, I say to myself ~~"Lillian, you should have remained a virgin." -- Lillian Carter (mother of Jimmy Carter)
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps. Last edited by Ustwo; 09-15-2006 at 08:54 PM.. |
||
09-15-2006, 07:37 PM | #2 (permalink) |
Kiss of Death
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
|
I often wonder if people take Carter seriously. I mean, I give the man props as an idealist and humanist, but that is where kudos should be drawn. You can't call him a lame duck president, he wasn't afforded a second term. He legitimately might be one of the worst presidents the Union has seen; how can you suck so much coming off Nixon and Ford is beyond me. Bottom line is the guy had a failed presidency, and in the context of our times he is not only irrelevant, but his commentary is insignificant and detrimental to the country. Hey James, how did the Camp David accords work out for you?
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. |
09-15-2006, 07:37 PM | #3 (permalink) |
Getting it.
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
|
His criticism is entirely legitimate. It is hardly an attack on the UK.
The current UK admin HAS been (to all appearences) the current US admin's bitch. Carter, a democrat, is suggesting that the UK's admin blew the opportunity to use it's influence to temper the wost of the US admin's actions. Many agree that had Bush just stayed focused on Afghanistan and "the war on terror" and not pissed around in Iraq, the world would be a better place. Carter, is simply supporting that position. I see it as a reprimand and well timed one at that. There is about to be a regime change in the UK and one is looming in the US. These are important questions that we all need to ask ourselves. Sorry you feelings were hurt because one of your ex-presidents doesn't agree with your world view, or that of your current president. That's politics.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke |
09-15-2006, 07:49 PM | #4 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
BTW, I think most historians would say the Camp David Accords worked out quite well, given what the were drafted to accomplish - a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt and a process for creating an autonomous Palestinian authority in the West Bank and Gaza. Its unfortunate that subesquent presidents have not been able to build on it.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 09-15-2006 at 07:55 PM.. |
|
09-15-2006, 08:29 PM | #5 (permalink) |
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Is it just me or are old presidents now breaking the gentleman's code of not criticizing current administration choices, decisions and situations? I don't recall hearing from previous presidents in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. |
09-15-2006, 08:50 PM | #6 (permalink) | |
Pissing in the cornflakes
|
Quote:
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps. |
|
09-16-2006, 04:51 AM | #7 (permalink) | |
Tone.
|
Quote:
This kind of bullshit idiotic rhetoric might have worked 3 years ago when the nation was still foaming at the mouth to fight an illegal and useless war because they'd forgotten Vietnam but now that people remember that wars actually kill people, they're not so pleased that your friend Bush has gotten us into this mess. They're not gonna be as receptive to the party line anymore. |
|
09-16-2006, 05:05 AM | #8 (permalink) | |
Asshole
Administrator
Location: Chicago
|
Ustwo, how is anything Jimmy Carter says relavent? Who does Jimmy Carter represent other than Jimmy Carter? The only reason anyone asks his opinion is because of the job that he held 25 years ago, and he's no longer privy to the information he had back then. Other than an attempt to flame a former president does this post have a point? It would be one thing if there was a group of supporters rallying around Carter or if there were a Carter school of thought, but he's a private citizen now (albeit one with Secret Service protection).
By the way, Quote:
Sorry if I'm being a dick, but I'm really just perplexed as to your point here.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo |
|
09-16-2006, 05:34 AM | #9 (permalink) | |
Lennonite Priest
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
|
Quote:
2. Yes, there were ex-presidents before now that criticized how the government was being run. The Civil War is a great example. President John Tyler from Va. He tried to find a peace between the North and South and when it couldn't be reached, he took the South's side. OR Teddy Roosevelt felt that Taft was fucking up so badly he decided to split the party and run for president. Thus allowing Wilson to beat both of them. 3. Ex presidents are living far longer and in better health when they leave office. Most died shortly after leaving office. So to say, this is something new, isn't true at all.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?" Last edited by pan6467; 09-16-2006 at 08:49 AM.. |
|
09-16-2006, 06:07 AM | #10 (permalink) | ||
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
so of all the things you could have made a thread about--you know, cowboy's george's attempts to---um---"redefine" the geneva conventions, the creation of military tribunals that would work like star chamber courts in their ability to sentence defendants to death without letting them see the evidence against them etc.--you chose not only to criticize jimmy carter for saying something about tony blair that anyone who has been awake the past 5 pathetic years has known--but also to imply that somehow carter is "weakening america"
let's have a look at the carter center and see what it does to "weaken america": how about this, from the center's welcome page: Quote:
working to alleviate unnecessary suffering weakens your america. how about this: Quote:
advocating peace with justice clearly weakens your america, ustwo. emphasizing the importance of international rules--agreed to by all--also obviously weaken's your america. so does working to address histories of oppression. participation in the monitoring of elections to reduce voter fraud weakens your america. thinking for a moment about the bushproposals concerning the abuse of prisoners held in the cia phantom penal system, it is clear that there are two americas--and that in one of them all these are obviously wrong: peace, democracy, social justice.... and anyone advocates these kinds of "radical" views is exactly the sort you would expect the right to paint as a traitor. if carter really embodies the inverse of your far right america ustwo, then the question is not what is carter doing, but rather who the fuck wants your far right america? ========== btw i was not a fan of how carter functioned as president mostly because the policy apparatus over which he presided reduced his rhetoric of human dignity to little more than words--but as an independent citizen operating via an ngo, i see nothing bad in what jimmy carter has been doing--he is much more effective in the context of this ngo than he was as president.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
||
09-16-2006, 07:05 AM | #11 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Fort Worth, TX
|
Quote:
To claim that it was Carter's superior negotiation skills that caused the Peace Treaty is bunk. And for the Israel/PLO treaty? Yeah we all know how well that has worked.
__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas |
|
09-16-2006, 08:28 AM | #13 (permalink) | |
Pissing in the cornflakes
|
Quote:
When an ex-president, who says he doesn't know whats going on behind the scenes, criticizes our one major ally on the war on terror, its more than just someone who doesn't agree with conservatives. Its unconscionable.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps. |
|
09-16-2006, 08:33 AM | #14 (permalink) |
Kiss of Death
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
|
Exactly there is a certain repsonsibility one must exude before opening their mouth. Carter saying serves no purpose and in no way shape or form helps America, its allies, or any of our ongoing missions. All it does is further fracture the country, the world, and plays right into the PR campaign of the insurgency and broader terrorism. Just because you can do something, doesn't make doing it smart or right; that especially bodes true when you are an ex-pres.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. |
09-16-2006, 08:54 AM | #15 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
I find it very odd anyone has a problem with this, but I suppose it is an American eccentricity - in other nations, former leaders are free to support or oppose current policies. I think, as is often the case, some are overestimating the influence that ancient American presidents have on anything other than the stock market value of Depends.
Perhaps leaders who immediately precede the current leader have some influence, as you know, a lot of people Clinton did business with in the larger world are still around and might listen to him. Everyone that Carter did business with is long, long out of power and/or dead.
__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum. |
09-16-2006, 08:55 AM | #16 (permalink) |
Lennonite Priest
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
|
Again, this is nothing new in the scheme of ex-presidents and current. There have been many ex's that have spoken out against the currents.
The issue here is that the GOP perhaps fear that Carter's voice is respected too much and that people may listen to what he says and there maybe truth in what he says. Otherwise, why do you care so much and why is it such a big deal to you? Every person in the US has the right to speak out and to voice their opinion. To say an ex-president cannot is wrong and against what this country stands for. You may not like what he says and there may not be any merit or fact behind what he says, BUT he still has the right to say whatever he wants. Just because he was an ex president and voices his opinion does not mean it is any more valid or any less valid than anyone else's nor should anyone sit there and pass judgement and say "how dare he". He's exercising his right, just as you are when you say "how dare he."
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?" |
09-16-2006, 09:02 AM | #17 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
so i take it that you lads of the extreme right dont really like freedom of speech.
and that if you had any power, you would eliminate it in the name of national unity, the unity of will behind a nationalist project shaped by the clear need to stomp out enemies internal and external--united in this project behind the figure of a heroic leader----one delivered by providence to guide "us" through an interminable state of emergency to impose a purity of composition to the nation--start with ideological purity, then move to the really stupid projects, eh? it seems to me that as extreme reactionary politics american style slides closer and closer to the ash-heap that its few remaining supporters are beginning to show their explicitly authoritarian politics--they are dropping even the pretense of interest in democracy as the appeal of their politics evaporates in the face of its material consequences--no doubt the extreme right will spend its next extended period of political obscurity licking its wounds and consoling itself by repeating stories of how it was stabbed in the back by evildoers like jimmy carter. this is a whackjob('s) thread.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 09-16-2006 at 09:05 AM.. |
09-16-2006, 09:27 AM | #18 (permalink) |
Kiss of Death
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
|
I like how I am representative of the "extreme right" because I think certain people should use some responsibility when speaking. To me this is not an issue of free speech, I never said he shouldn't be able to say something, I said he should not willingly. It's funny how in this instance of war/conflict, the left finds themselves in a position of little power and sway, and their agenda has been crushed. What's worse is they have totally and utterly failed to grasp the reality, that the troops are staying in Iraq, they are not going anywhere, even if you take a lead in these midterms, there will be no dramatic shift in policy. You are the ones who do a disservice to the armed forces by keeping this country fractured, you only empower and embolden their enemy ala Vietnam, Lebanon, Somalia; and now Iraq.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. |
09-16-2006, 09:40 AM | #19 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
mojo: i am not interested in trading vague pronouncements beyond what i wrote above--which pertained to the logic of posts (including yours) within the thread.
unlike yourself it seems, i make no pretense to know what the future holds. i do not have any magical understanding of what november will bring. but i did see a national review article that said almost word for word the content of your post above. it seemed like a piece designed to rationalize defeat for the faithful. but i am less confident in my oracular abilities. perhaps because i do not precede my thinking with assumptions about having "mastered reality" as you do. so far as i am concerned, master of reality is best kept the title of a black sabbath record.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
09-16-2006, 09:43 AM | #20 (permalink) | |
Lennonite Priest
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
|
Quote:
To me this isn't about the context of what Carter said, because I don't allow anyone to influence my opinion based on just who they are or what office they hold. I base my opinion on my knowledge, what facts on both sides I can get, and the opinion of people I respect, and again that doesn't mean just because he held an office I respect his views, more than another's or because he is from my party, I respect his views more than another's or or because he suffers from mental issues, or is/was a convict I don't respect his views, less than another's. In other words, what Carter said doesn't change my mind on this issue, or for that matter even add to my opinion on the issue. Basically because, I truly don't find what Carter said to be of any use in forming my opinion. To me this is the Limbaugh GOP'er trying to cry about how someone, people may respect and value the opinion of, disagrees with their views and how that person should not have the right ..... oops..... that person should not say what they feel they need to, because it puts forth a differing view.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?" |
|
09-16-2006, 09:52 AM | #21 (permalink) |
Deja Moo
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
|
I find it odd that this is being described as attacking an ally. Anyone interested in international politics would know that in the last two weeks the Labour Party has all but enacted a coup on Tony Blair, forcing him to give a date for his resignation (as promised in the last election). The sole reason for this action was Blair following Bush in lockstep for any Bush policy, without regard for the best interests of Britain.
Carter didn't say anything that the Labour Party or the majority of citizens had not determined for themselves. |
09-16-2006, 09:57 AM | #22 (permalink) |
Kiss of Death
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
|
I don't get where this prevaling notion of defeat comes from. Shit in Iraq is bad, and is uncomfortably behind schdule, but in no sense of the (or maybe just mine) imagination is it lost. I'm going to have to leave it at that for right now so as not to completely thread jack. As for my words acting off of predictions of the future, or my monopoly of reality, I don't see it has that; I call it thoughts and notions stemming from observation, and deductions from reasoning.
For you RB a question, which I'm sure you stated before, would you indulge me once again. You are a teacher, what is your field? And a thought, the biggest impediment to truth is not ignorance, it is arrogance.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. |
09-16-2006, 09:58 AM | #23 (permalink) |
Junkie
|
Ustwo and Mojo, it isn't that his comments hurt America it is that they hurt your view of what America should be. There is a big difference. I'm sure there are many people out there who feel that what he is saying helps their view of what America should be and what Bush is doing hurts it. Let's not confuse what each of us individually feel America should be with what everyone else feels it should be. There are millions of different ideas of what it should be and what makes your view right?
|
09-16-2006, 09:59 AM | #24 (permalink) | ||
Kiss of Death
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
|
Quote:
Quote:
It is accepted that not all speech is protected.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. Last edited by Mojo_PeiPei; 09-16-2006 at 10:04 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
||
09-16-2006, 10:11 AM | #25 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
mojo: my field?
most of my history work is on post-1945 france. but i work in a number of areas. why do you ask?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
09-16-2006, 10:20 AM | #26 (permalink) |
Kiss of Death
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
|
Trying to get a feel for the basis of your knowledge perhaps. Not that I would limit you merely to that, or invalidate you in any way, just curious mostly.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. |
09-16-2006, 11:02 AM | #27 (permalink) | ||
"Afternoon everybody." "NORM!"
Location: Poland, Ohio // Clarion University of PA.
|
Quote:
What seems to be implied here though is that anyone who criticizes Blair's willingness to follow in the exact footsteps as the President is wishing for us to break our Alliance with England. Which I find absurd. That's almost alone the same lines as we're unpatriotic if we don't like our own country's policies. And besides, who cares how Carter ran his Presidency? That has nothing to do with how he forms opinions about how current/future Presidents run theirs. And yes, he does have the right to say what he wishes, because we let Journalists agree with or disagree with other Presidents even though they have never been President either. Besides, as it was stated before, the English people are very mad at Blair for following our President's footsteps for quite some time now. Are they too against our alliance? Do they hate America? Do they want the UK to rot in total anarchy! No. They just think what's going on is wrong, and the UKs policies shouldn't precisely mirror our's without more thought. We can still be allies and disagree. Quote:
__________________
"Marino could do it." Last edited by Paradise Lost; 09-16-2006 at 11:11 AM.. |
||
09-16-2006, 11:47 AM | #28 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
At least now, when iraq descends into civil war and we get hit by the terrorists again you folks can blame it all on jimmy carter. Certainly, if our nation is any weaker it can't have anything to do with the people who are actually in charge of it.
Jimmy carter is working to weaken the usa? Please. Jimmy carter has no power whatsoever. You know who's really working to weaken the usa? The guy who has overextended our military in an irrelevant struggle against a weak and unthreatening country. |
09-16-2006, 11:52 AM | #29 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
|
What kind of crazy world do you have to live in to twist a cliched phrase like "I haven't seen any evidence of it" into a confession of ignorance of the world around you?
T'were it not for stagflation and the hostage situation, we'd probably remember Carter as the guy that really established diplomatic relations with China, formed the Dept of Energy, and helped the SALT II treaty... and beat a bunny rabbit with an oar. On the subject of stagflation and the hostage situation and 12 years of republicans. Well. Iran-Contra to the Carlyle Group. Might have been something going on behind the scenes, there.
__________________
Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions Last edited by 1010011010; 09-16-2006 at 11:55 AM.. |
09-16-2006, 12:37 PM | #30 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Fort Worth, TX
|
Quote:
None of us said he should be imprisoned or silenced. All this happens to be is a man who was worthless as president, and now flings his presidential seal like a rent-a-cop who flashes his cop badge because 20 years ago he was in the force before being fired for incompetence.
__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas |
|
09-16-2006, 12:44 PM | #31 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
|
09-16-2006, 01:07 PM | #33 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Thanks for your clarification. I wasnt sure what you meant by "empowering and emboldening their enemy"
At least your comments were not as strident as recent comments by Condi Rice, making some convoluted comparison that opposing Bush's war policy would have been like abandoning the Civil War and letting slavery remain in the south. (WTF!) Quote:
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 09-16-2006 at 01:11 PM.. |
|
09-16-2006, 01:27 PM | #34 (permalink) | ||||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
09-16-2006, 03:10 PM | #35 (permalink) |
Addict
|
Leveling a specific criticism at an ally doesn't "weaken America" (particularly when the criticism is an apt one, but on that matter I concede that reasonable people may disagree.)
For those who are in agreement with the OP on this issue, do you not think that the perception of our main ally as an obedient client state has damaged our ability to win the ideological conflicts in which we're now engaged? Will America's interests be well-served once Blair is out and the backlash against his policy towards the US begins? It is fairly clear that his successor will not have the same attitude towards the United States. It's not at all self-evident that Carter's position or his statement hurts America. If you truly think it does, then it follows that, as roachboy said earlier, we're talking about two very different conceptions of what America is and should be. |
09-16-2006, 05:19 PM | #36 (permalink) | |||
Psycho
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What strikes me as ridiculous is that no one has given us any reason to disagree with the Carter statement. Is something that is completely apparent really a problem to America? We're in sad shape if such a statement causes us a problem. But I guess it's harder and harder to find things outside of the administration to point a finger at. |
|||
09-16-2006, 05:28 PM | #37 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Carter was just #3 of the new deal democrat presidents bent on destroying America. He just got off to a late start is all.....like 20 years after his presidency.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
09-16-2006, 11:36 PM | #38 (permalink) |
Lennonite Priest
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
|
What amazes me is the people on the Right keep bringing up Carter's presidency, yet as others have stated, noone has challenged what he said.
In fact by bringing more attention to it and just being all hateful with no debate, no true discussion other than how bad a president he was, and how he "weakened us" and basically saying, he had no right to say anything and should be shut up...... you weaken your whole stance. Personally, I was 9 when he was elected in '76 and I was 13 when he left office. Carter faced an uphill battle. Nixon and Agnew had pretty much destroyed faith in the government, we were coming out of an extremely expensive unpopular war, and the nation was alreadfy hurting. Carter, really didn't do anything to help the nation or hurt the nation. Inflation, high interest rates and unemployment were pretty much coming anyway. There wasn't anything he could do to stop it at the time. Carter also was too trusting and put in some people that were corruptable. Carter, as a president, was probably one of the worst, but not because of what he did or didn't do, but because of what he walked into. The GOP and Nixon had pretty much left the nation in a mess. Carter's biggest strength is his diplomacy and intelligence on world affairs, his weakness was trusting the wrong people and quite frankly he wasn't cold hearted and self centered enough to be president. But, he was what the country needed at that moment to save it domestically...... someone the people could trust and like as a person. How will true history judge him in another 20+ years when it's been 50 years since he was president.... I really don't think he'll be thought of much. He'll go down as a Buchanan, Fillmore, Polk, Cleveland.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?" |
09-17-2006, 06:08 AM | #39 (permalink) | |||||
Banned
|
Here are the effects, in borrowed dollars, of "leadership" choices:
From: http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm 12/29/1961 $296,168,761,214.92 Start of JFK's First budget year 12/31/1969 $368,225,581,254.41 Start of Nixon's first budget year 12/30/1977 $718,943,000,000.00 start of Carter's first budget year 12/31/1981 $1,028,729,000,000.00 start of Reagan's first budget year 09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32 start of Bush 41's first budget year 09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 start of Clinton's first budget year 09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06 start of Bush 43's first budget year 09/12/2006 $8,534,633,344,894.82 http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm In 1980 When the total treasury debt stood at $995 billion, and the US was well into the process of turning away from the failed policies of militarism that resulted in the 1975 withdrawal of US presence in South Vietnam, and had developed a "model" foreign policy with a foundation firmly anchored in a new priority for championing human rights, nationally and internationally, and national priorities were identified with energy conservation and independence, the US electorate chose: <b>Republican leadership that stressed militarism over diplomacy, WASP centric discrimination against women, gays, and minorities, over equality, resulting in huge deficit spending,</b> accompanied by cuts in domestic social programs, workers rights, worker safety regulation, environmental protection, energy independence research and subsidies, and taxes on the wealthy and on business. Spending shifted to finance a huge military buildup, and to corporate entitlements and agency wrecking, "cronyism" appointments, similar to what we witnessed, last year, with the FEMA implosion.</b> When the US electorate shifted away from the political leadership that had sponsored what I described above, the national treasury <b>debt was almost 4-1/2 times the level of 12 years before, at $4,411,488,883,139.38.</b> After eight years of reduction in all of the areas that I described above, including an increase on taxes on the income of the rich, reduced military spending, aggressive environmental regulation and protectiong of federal lands and wildlife habitat, the rights of gays, women and minorities, and a renewed pursuit of diplomatic solutions in the M.E.. with China, and in world trade, with a long term emphasis on solving CO2 emissions damage to the environment, the US electorate <b>by a razor thin margin, if any....</b>chose: <b>Republican leadership that stressed militarism over diplomacy, WASP centric discrimination against women, gays, and minorities, over equality, and huge deficit spending,</b> accompanied by cuts in domestic social programs, workers rights, worker safety regulation, environmental protection, energy independence research and subsidies, and taxes on the wealthy and on business. Spending shifted to finance a huge military buildup, and to corporate entitlements and agency wrecking, "cronyism" appointments, similar to what we witnessed, last year, with the FEMA implosion.</b> This time, the militarism included a policy of preemption, resulting in an increase to the national treasury debt of $2,727 billion, in just 59-1/2 months.... Can anyone who "knows" that the republican leadership that, for the last 45 years, always makes us "stronger", except in the areas of diplomacy, respect for individual and human rights, policies and programs to keep less of us out of poverty and uninsured medically, and progressive taxation, government ethics and quality of political appointments and "open" government, energy conservation and independence, environmental protection and private encroachment and exploitation of irreplacable resources on public land, and appointment of judges committed to a priority of protecting the least of us from the rest of us, safeguards that insure a fair and transparent bidding process on government contracts that results in best price and quality for the taxpayers, financial support for public housing, mass transit, and vital inner city infrastructure, parks, and public safety....along with mind numbing, eye popping, deficit growth, <b>explain to me how the "tax and spend liberals" are worse, when the numbers and the results are compared, during and after the leadership time periods of each?</b> ....because, I don't see it. I see that one choice, is so clearly superior to the other....based on the experience of the last 45 years, and of the deficit numbers and the rise and fall of the reputation of the US in the global community, and how our goverment regards us, relates to us, protects us and the environment, who and how it taxes the most, and increases and reduces taxes on, and what it willingly discloses to us, and refuses to disclose, that I wonder how those who are so sure that "Carter was a bad president", and Reagan was a wonderful one...." come by that opinion. I'm guessing that it must be the influence of ideology, because the numbers and the trends, when each was in office, and from the legacy that each left the rest of us, speak clearly, for themselves. For the nation, is "stronger" with a huge, unserviceable, recently accumulated treasury debt, a legacy that is "less weak" than a legacy that leaves a debt less than half the size, with less militarism, but a well respected diplomatic reputation, human rights principles, and perceived equality at home, a stronger social safety net, a judiciary that defends individual, and consumer rights, and environmental protection, over corporate and government lawyers priorities and arguments? Looking at the numbers, is the militaristic party governance, if it spends much more time "leading us", even sustainable, financially? Would we really be worse off today, if Carter had been given another four years, to pursue the following agenda, and if the "Reagan Revolution", had never occured? How? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
from the Reagan and 2X Bush administrations, than they would have from four additional years of a Carter presidency, and six years of Al Gore, vs, the ten years that the republicans held the presidency, instead? Are we, as a nation, safer, enjoying higher environmental quality, more energy independence and conservation, more individual rights, better education and social services, less poverty, better maintained public infrastructure, and better relations with our allies, and non-aligned nations, in a world that has a higher priority of promoting human rights and uniform justice....are our courts more representative and sensitive to today's population demographics in the US....is the workplace safer, and labor organizing oversight, and SEC oversight, and the fiscal soundness of our corporations, because of the higher debt that the ten extra years of republican presidential administration, and congressional "leadership", has provided to us, than if democrats had been elected and served? Is our government less corrupt, more transparent? Can anyone make an argument that Carter and Gore could have governed in some way that would have been less fair, shortchanged us more, left us with more debt, and in a worse state in our relationship with the community of nations, than we find ourselves in, today? Could we possibly be more dependent on imported petroleum, have a higher trade and budget deficit, have cities and race relations in worse shape, than they are today? Speaking for the 150 million Americans who control less than 2-1/2 percent of the national wealth, and the forty percent who control another 27 percent of that wealth, I just don't see how they could have produced worse results or greater debt, or more gender, race, and sexual orientation based discrimination and inequality or worse international relations, or a greater threat to national security that exorbitant treasury debt and disproportionate energy consumption and dependence, compared to all other nations, than what we currently experience, in all of those categories, can you....how? Last edited by host; 09-17-2006 at 06:18 AM.. |
|||||
09-17-2006, 06:39 AM | #40 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
America's image around the world is at an all-time low and it has nothing to do with Carter and everything to do with Bush's foreign policy and actions.
From a recent Pew Global Attitudes Project America's global image has again slipped and support for the war on terrorism has declined even among close U.S. allies like Japan. The war in Iraq is a continuing drag on opinions of the United States, not only in predominantly Muslim countries but in Europe and Asia as well. And despite growing concern over Iran's nuclear ambitions, the U.S. presence in Iraq is cited at least as often as Iran - and in many countries much more often - as a danger to world peace. The survey shows that the Iraq war continues to exact a toll on America's overall image and on support for the struggle against terrorism. Majorities in 10 of 14 foreign countries surveyed say that the war in Iraq has made the world a more dangerous place. In Great Britain, America's most important ally in Iraq, 60% say the war has made the world more dangerous, while just half that number (30%) feel it has made the world safer. The U.S.-led war on terror draws majority support in just two countries - India and Russia. When much of the world considers the US a greater threat to world peace than Iran or North Korea, how does that help our global war on terrorism? THe full Pew Report: http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=252
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 09-17-2006 at 02:43 PM.. |
Tags |
carter, jimmy, usa, weakening, working |
|
|