|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 119 responses total. |
richard
|
|
response 81 of 119:
| 
Feb 10 21:27 UTC 2006 |
Carter also negotiated the peace between egypt and israel, the famous camp
david accords involving him, Begin and Sadat. A considerable accomplishment,
which he made possible, a peace which lasts between those two countries to
this day.
|
tod
|
|
response 82 of 119:
|
Feb 10 21:30 UTC 2006 |
Yea but he's a Whacko! He's an enemy of freedom
He's lettin the terra ists win
You can't send mixed messages
Its a hard job!
|
cross
|
|
response 83 of 119:
|
Feb 10 21:40 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
tod
|
|
response 84 of 119:
|
Feb 10 21:43 UTC 2006 |
Look at the bright side..2 million more jobs were created (forget that many
of them were for DHS, CIA, and FEMA out-of-state contractor gigs!)
|
richard
|
|
response 85 of 119:
|
Feb 10 21:44 UTC 2006 |
bru still harbors under the illusion that we can make a country or region of
the world safer with sheer brute force. Iran and Iraq are what they are, we
can change regimes, and force democracies on them, but we cannot change the
people, no matter how many troops we send in. We haven't broken the Iraqis
will, quite the opposite, they are more mobilized against us now than ever.
The world is LESS SAFE now than it was before the invasion. Considerably less
safe.
./
/
|
tod
|
|
response 86 of 119:
|
Feb 10 21:55 UTC 2006 |
If anything, our military how revealed its weaknesses in urban warfare to al
Qaeda with nothing to show for it. Iran is not a military option.
|
jep
|
|
response 87 of 119:
|
Feb 10 21:58 UTC 2006 |
Oh, come now. Force works very well. When is the last time you heard
about any problem occurring in Grenada?
|
tod
|
|
response 88 of 119:
|
Feb 10 22:20 UTC 2006 |
Grenada? That's like taking candy from a baby. It was a spat with Cuba over
their marxist puppet. Reference something relevant like Beirut at least.
|
fitz
|
|
response 89 of 119:
|
Feb 10 22:59 UTC 2006 |
I believe that a retired diplomat wrote that while it's true that negotiations
to release the hostages in Iran were continuous, the decision of when to
return them was deliberately timed to coincide with Reagan's taking office
in order to further embarrass Carter.
I forgot the name of the diplomat. Anyway, it makes a plausible circumstance
where both Carter and Reagan gain the freedom of the hostages.
|
tod
|
|
response 90 of 119:
|
Feb 10 23:07 UTC 2006 |
Ronnie gave them a couple rifles to wait an extra week for his inauguration.
|
khamsun
|
|
response 91 of 119:
|
Feb 11 01:12 UTC 2006 |
this side of the ocean, it's often considered that Carter was the 1st in
shifting the US foreign policy away from support to dictatures and the
banana republic model.And his Nobel Prize is well deserved.
But at the same time he's still an imperialist (the belief of US
cultural and political superiority.)
His *big* error: together with his advisor Brzezinski, they didn't have
a clue of the inner working of the already dying soviet system, and
obsessed with the afghan-trap idea, are responsible for the whole
radical-islam monster.Instead, Moscow, used to deal for centuries with
muslim cultures had a clear vision and tried to oppose what was to be
the taliban.
Btw, where is Osama, you know, the guy responsible for the death of the
NYC towers bombing?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 92 of 119:
|
Feb 11 03:16 UTC 2006 |
We'll only be able to call Afghanistan and Iraq democracies *after we leave*
if open democratic governments survive with equal rights for all citizens.
|
cross
|
|
response 93 of 119:
|
Feb 11 04:45 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
khamsun
|
|
response 94 of 119:
|
Feb 11 05:45 UTC 2006 |
Re #93:
(Carter & Iraq ??)
> Had it not been for Europe, there would be no Iraq.
you mean the franco-british agreement in WWI and the shaping of Iraq by
the Brits?
|
sholmes
|
|
response 95 of 119:
|
Feb 11 10:45 UTC 2006 |
Woah ! I bet Osama says so too , big deal we bombed the twin tower , for a
better prospect of a more elegant building in place.
|
cross
|
|
response 96 of 119:
|
Feb 11 16:44 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
tod
|
|
response 97 of 119:
|
Feb 13 17:04 UTC 2006 |
Manifest Destiny and Plunder! USA USA USA!
|
cross
|
|
response 98 of 119:
|
Feb 13 22:55 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 99 of 119:
|
Feb 14 02:14 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:5: That's because Republicans always form a cult of personality
around their President. To them there is no real distinction between
the man and the policy; to criticize one is to criticize the other.
This is also why it's taken them six years to realize George W. Bush is
not actually a conservative.
Re resp:11, resp:12: Those sound like funerals I'd actually want to go
to. I tend to avoid funerals, but that's mainly because of how they're
held. I'd rather have a beer and sit around talking about the good
times from the guy's life than sit in a dark, depressing chapel and
listen to a preacher.
Re resp:61: I dunno. Every time I see her I think, "Man, she needs to
go on 'What Not To Wear' so someone can show her how to dress her age."
Re resp:67: There's a great headline in the Onion's "Our Dumb Century"
book: "Iranian Hostages Released: Reagan Implores American People Not
To Put Two And Two Together"
|
johnnie
|
|
response 100 of 119:
|
Feb 14 04:01 UTC 2006 |
It's fact-check time at the Sludge Report!
A while back, klg said some unkind things about Jimmy Carter, "America's
Favorite Ex-President". He claimed his sources were Peter Bourne's
"Jimmy Carter: A Comprehensive Biography from Plains to
Post-Presidency", pp. 192-3, and Carter's own "Our Endangered Values",
p. 79. Let's go to the tape:
>Carter campaigned for governor as a self-proclaimed redneck,
Nope. Didn't do that, as far as I can tell from klg's "sources".
Actually, the Carter-authored book doesn't seem to be much of a source
at all; none of this stuff is in there (page 79 in particular talks
about prison reform and the death penalty).
>(Carter) pledged to invited George Wallace to address the Peach State
>legislature,
Carter's opponent in the governor's race had prevented Wallace from
speaking to the Georgia legislature, and had attempted to ban Wallace
from speaking even to private groups. Carter criticized that, saying it
would mean "stifling communications with another state", and pledged to
invite Wallace to Georgia (not "to address the legislature") to make
nice. Of course, this played well with the more conservative elements
in Georgia. And while it may be true that Carter's campaign back then
attempted to play both sides of the street (and, gosh, no other
politician has ever done that), his inauguration speech got national
attention (and angered said conservative elements) for it's forthright
denunciation of racism.
>presided over a campaign that distributed a photo of a political
>opponent being embraced by black basketball players to a Ku Klux Klan
>rally.
Carter's opponent owned a basketball team. At some point, there
appeared in the newspaper the typical "(black) player pouring champange
over the head of the team owner after a big victory" photo. This photo
was included in a flyer distributed in more conservative areas,
alledgedly in part by a member of the Carter campaign. Carter denied
then and denies now that he knew anything about the flyer. The campaign
official who distributed said flyer reportedly was known to complain
that Carter was saying too many nice things about blacks to win the
election.
>Also forgotten was Carter s statement that he was proud to have
>arch-segregationist Lester Maddox as his lieutenant governor in 1970,
>calling him the essence of the Democratic Party.
There's nothing about this in the Carter bio klg claims as his source.
Instead what it says is that Carter first ran for governor (giving up
what would have been the sure win of a Congressional seat) in a
long-shot attempt to keep Maddox (or worse, a Republican) from becoming
governor, and they remained bitter political enemies even when Gov and
Vice-Gov together. (Maddox beat Carter back then, by the way, thanks to
heavy cross-over voting from Republicans)
At any rate, come the Governor's race in '70, Carter had to make nice
with Maddox; he was on the same ticket. He couldn't very well say,
"vote for me, even though my running mate is the spawn of the devil".
As for the "essence of the Dem party" quote, according to Time magazine,
what Carter said was "(Maddox's) inclination to campaign directly with
the people, in the streets, in the factories, in the barber shops and
beauty parlors, represents the essence of the Democratic party."
Maddox's campaign style, not the man or his beliefs.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 101 of 119:
|
Feb 14 07:08 UTC 2006 |
I'd only repeat that Carter an Maddox were not "on the same ticket".
They just ran at the same time as Democrats. In some other elections the
governor and lieutenant governor of Georgia were of different parties.
|
klg
|
|
response 102 of 119:
|
Feb 14 11:41 UTC 2006 |
Please, Johnniejohnny, it is the Kludge Report. Let's be accurate.
|
johnnie
|
|
response 103 of 119:
|
Feb 14 14:27 UTC 2006 |
I'm just giving the story as according to your stated sources, my friend.
>Carter an Maddox were not "on the same ticket".
>They just ran at the same time as Democrats.
It's the same thing. All the guys and gals from one party running at
the same time (for Governor, President, Congress, Water Commissioner,
Dog Catcher, etc) are said to be on the party "ticket". They weren't
"running mates", true, but I just stated it that way for sake of
expediency, since it didn't effect the accuracy of the statement and
"running mate" is simpler and quicker and effectively true enough so
that I wouldn't have to interrupt the narrative flow for a lengthly and
ultimately extraneous explanation such as this one.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 104 of 119:
|
Feb 14 17:51 UTC 2006 |
To be "on the same ticket" one would have to be able to vote for both by
pulling one lever or x-ing one box. Was that how the ballot was structured?
|
mcnally
|
|
response 105 of 119:
|
Feb 14 19:22 UTC 2006 |
OK, they were on the same slate. Happy?
|