| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Jimmy Carter: A National Disgrace
Former President Jimmy Carter once again embarrassed himself, and frankly, the nation last week. Stretching way into the deck to play the race card over Congressman Joe Wilson’s “You lie” remark, Carter said, "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American." And this pearl of wisdom as he continued, "I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a long way, and I've seen the rest of the country that shares the South's attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African-Americans.""I think it's based on racism," Carter said at a town hall held at his presidential center in Atlanta. "There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."
Well Mr. Carter, I live in the south, too, and I say you are just a clueless old man who should go back to peanut farming since you apparently have nothing intelligent to say. There is an “inherent feeling” among anybody with an IQ in triple digits that you should just shut up. I apologize to the Office of the Presidency for that language, but I just can’t muster any respect for a lying race baiter. There is absolutley no evidence that Wilson’s comment had anything whatsoever to do with race. Nor is the national opposition to Obama’s heath care proposals based on race. It’s based on a belief that nationalization of health care is a bad idea. I was against it when Hillary tried it in the early nineties, too. Was I racist then? Mr. Carter continues to proudly display his incompetence and irrelevance for all to see.I get so sick of this disengenuous garbage from people like Carter when they imply that conservatives in general and Republicans specifically are racist. Maybe it’s time for a little history lesson for the former president.
In 1964, it took the leadership of Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen to break the Democratic filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. That filibuster was led by current Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, and then Democrat Senator Al Gore Sr. of Tennessee. In the Senate, only six Republicans voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, compared to twenty-one Democrats in opposition. In the House, 40% of the Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act, while only 20% of Republicans opposed it. And yes, that would be the same Democrat Senator Byrd who was a proud former member of the KKK.
Were Republicans racist when they named the first two black Secretaries of State, Powell and then Rice, to office? Were they racist when they put the first black Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas, in place? Would it be fair to say the Democrats were racist when they publicly and unjustifiably vilified Justice Thomas and his family? I make no such claim, but I have no doubt it would have been claimed by the Democrats had the roles been reversed. Does the average liberal genius Democrat out there even know that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican?
Was Democrat former President Clinton racist when he said that William Fulbright was a visionary and was a hero to him? Fulbright was a vehement segregationalist and was one of the Democrats opposed to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.Carter’s own abysmal record on things racial brings into question his standing to criticize anyone regarding such issues. When Carter returned to Georgia after his Navy tour, he became a member of the Sumter County School Board. As documented in the National review Online (Sep. 18, 2009) “Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU’s Voting Project, relates in his book A Voting Rights Odyssey: Black Enfranchisement in Georgia, Carter’s board tried to stop the construction of a new “Elementary Negro School” in 1956. Local white citizens had complained that the school would be “too close” to a white school. As a result, “the children, both colored and white, would have to travel the same streets and roads in order to reach their respective schools.” The prospect of black and white children commingling on the streets on their way to school was apparently so horrible to Carter that he requested that the state school board stop construction of the black school until a new site could be found. The state board turned down Carter’s request because of “the staggering cost.” Carter and the rest of the Sumter County School Board then reassured parents at a meeting on October 5, 1956, that the board “would do everything in its power to minimize simultaneous traffic between white and colored students in route to and from school.”
And this from noted Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz in Frontpage Magazine, April 27, 2007, “If he who pays the piper calls the tune, then Carter's off-key tunes have been called by his Saudi Arabian paymasters. It pains me to say this, but I now believe that there is no person in American public life today who has a lower ratio of real to apparent integrity than Jimmy Carter. The public perception of his integrity is extraordinarily high. His real integrity, it now turns out, is extraordinarily low. He is no better than so many former American politicians who, after leaving public life, sell themselves to the highest bidder and become lobbyists for despicable causes. That is now Jimmy Carter's sad legacy.”
Carter had a cozy, personal relationship with former Palestinian dictator Yassir Arafat. In fact, he seems to have some affinity for thug dictators around the world, chumming with the likes of Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, former Yugoslav strongman Marshal Josef Tito, former Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaucescu, former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos, former Pakistani General Zia ul-Haq, former North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung and now his son Kim Jong Il, among others. His anti-Israel positions are well documented, including in his own book, "Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid." As an author, Mr. Carter has the dubious distinction of having his book an the must read list of none other than Osama bin Laden.
Jimmy Carter is widely accepted as the worst U.S. President ever. His attempts at Middle East peace were jokes to everyone except him and the Nobel prize committee. His term was a disaster, and he went downhill from there. He has no credibility to be critical of anyone regarding race relations, or frankly, anything else. Just retire already.
read more at http://commonconservativesense.com
- mike from nc's blog
- Login or register to post comments


Comments
I was against it when Hillary
No, you were sexist. And if it was LiebermanCare, you'd be anti-semitic. And I don't know of any openly gay Congressmen, but if there was one and he/she proposed healthcare, and you opposed it, yea you'd be homophobic.
Barney Frank proudly flies
Barney Frank proudly flies the gay flag. In fact I heard him this week describing a skinny dipping episode with his "boyfriend". I get your point and you're right, but that's a visual that triggers my gag reflex.
Wilson and race
OK, so he didn't yell "you lie, boy", but even so there is no question in my mind that race was a factor.
The words spoken by Obama that triggered the outburst were in and of themselves unexceptional and nothing new. So what caused Wilson to boil over? Since it wasn't the words, it must have been the man - Wilson could not contain his contempt. Now, add in the facts that he is one of the rump that wanted the Confederate flag flying over his state capitol, and he belongs to the Sons of Confederate Veterans, which may have once been harmless but has been taken over by white supremacists, and then add in his outright lie about having been an immigration lawyer, and what emerges is a picture of man with issues about race.
You can rant about Carter and politics in the 1960's all you want - people are going to judge this situation by the words and deeds of 2009. Is all opposition to Obama race-based? Absolutely not. Is a portion of it? Absolutely.
Mead50 is now a mind reader
I'm glad your mind reading capabilities are acute enough to know what was in the back of Wilson's mind. Can you travel through time, too? I repeat - there is NO evidence of any racial component in his comment. Inappropriate and boorish? Yes, I think so. Racially motivated? Nope.
Just so I understand - after references to some historical allegations regarding Wilson, you remind us that people are going to judge this situation by the words and deeds of 2009. Oh, I see. If a conservative does something you disapprove of, that's forever. But it matters not what a liberal does since we only care about the here and now. Got it.
By the way, the piece isn't about Wilson. It's about Carter's hypocrisy.
I just gave you three pieces of evidence
Two from Wilson's past history and one from his conduct immediately after his blunder.
I do not claim to be a mind reader. But anyone who isn't a child understands that people are complex packages.
Circumstantial evidence may be circumstantial - but it is still evidence.
The only way I could agree with your conclusion that race isn't a factor (for which, BTW, you offer no evidence or rationale) is to extend to Wilson the benefit of the doubt beyond the bounds of reason.
A white man from South Carolina with a fondness for the Confederacy commits a massive breach of decorum to heckle the first black president....what kind of a nut am I to think that race was a factor?
Mead50 and the other errand boys of the Victims-R-Us clan...
That, from an American patriot standing in the street near the Capitol.
Play the race card if you want; no one cares anymore because it just takes the Nation's focus off ObamaCare and returns it rightly to his failure as President to unite us, to heal our wounds, to give us Hope in new Change and underscores his inherent dishonesty and duplicity when running.
The effort that the Democrats invested building a Victimhood Industry in politics is wearing thin on the majority of independent voters you NEED in order to win.
At that same event there were also signs
calling Obama a lying African and misc other things as well. So if you think that picture proves your point, then I guess these other other signs prove my point.
I haven't seen any evidence of anyone trying to play the victim.
Poor attempt at spin, Mead50, because...
the issue is JimmyCarter's outlandish statement that the people protesting on 9-12 and the Honorable Joe Wilson, MC, comments were --get this-- racism.
It isn't an issue of whether America is still plagued by racial issues on other scores... and I agree with Obama's AttyGen when he said we were a Nation of cowards on confronting a host of racial issues --especially cowardly are the national Democrats who continue to use the RaceCard to shut-down debate, scare and shame opponents away from the public square --as was Mr Carter's attempt at playing the RaceCard in this case. Oh, they wouldn't do that?? Yeah, tell that the people at Humana Inc who sent out a letter and learned this week that the Obama Administration will shut them down on MediCare reimbursements if they say anything adverse about the Great O's health care reform proposals.
Nation of cowards on racial issues --Obama is the leading conscientious objector there.
I'd like to see Obama spend a little less time woo'ing international despots and tyrants while skirting the globe in AirForceOne and spend some time in Washington DC explaining to poor, mostly black children why he is keeping them in substandard schools by killing the unique and popular DC Voucher Program. I'd like to see Obama spend more time worrying about the horrible state of the black family in America and less time worrying about fake issues like global warming at the UN. I'd like to see Obama focus in on how we fix the rotting, fetid, crime-covered big cities in America run by corrupt, near-despotic mis-managers who are generally Democrats. And the answer isn't to toss more HUD money at the problem... it's to fix the corruption and make the cities a place people WANT to live again... not run away from.
Is race a problem in America? Sure. SO quick flapping those gums and do something constructive about it, my Democrat friends... and I don't mean giving more money to mostly black activist groups like ACORN that can't manage their own piss in a pothole. You can begin by restraining other Demo-gogues who continue to use inappropriate racial accusations to quiet opponents of Obama's proposals.
Carter tried to do exactly that with his accusation of racism. You do the same here by claiming that some racially sensitive posters in a sea of millions indicts the crowd. No it doesn't; no it didn't; yes you did.
The poster-maker says it right: No matter what is on the poster, Democrats will call it racist. Just like you did here, Mead50. Just like Carter did. And that's playing the RaceCard and even after playing the RaceCard, your deck is still missing more than few cards.
Now, what was your further nonsense about the Democrats are NOT the Party of Victimhood? Really, you need an education on that too?
In response all I can say is that
some of what I saw on display on 9/12 WAS racist, and I believe that Joe Wilson's outburst is most logically explained by him having a racist inclination.
For me, racism is the trifecta - immoral, stupid, and dangerous. And so I call it when I see it - that isn't victim hood.
Coddling racists is a terrible strategy. It may help preserve a few districts here and there, but it is going to hamstring the party from attracting new voters.
Coddling racists ?
I assume you are referring to the Democrat party appeasing the likes of professinal race peddlers Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Oh, and let's not leave out Louis Farrakan, the supreme racist. Obama himself acted in an overtly racist manner when he immediately indicted the police sergeant who arrested his pal Henry Gates. Gates in turn, displayed his racism as well. I could go on and on and on.
Who are you going to counter with - David Duke?
Join the real world Mead. Yes, racism is alive and well in America, and it resides primarily in liberal hearts.
Could not agree with you more
about Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakan.
However, note my point - coddling racists is a bad strategy. Obama made a point of running AWAY from these sad sacks. He made himself electable by reassuring voters that those losers were not the way forward:
That is what you do with a racist/anti-Semite - you denounce him.
If the Republicans want to make themselves electable, they can't have it both ways - they can't say that they condone racist and then do nothing about the racists in their midst.
As for the Gates thing: it IS a stupid thing to take an infirm person of any color from their living rooms in handcuffs for telling a police officer - who no longer had any business for being there - to leave. Here is exactly what Obama said:
Obama is specifically saying that he does not know what role race placed - but he does know that pulling an unwell old man out of his home and dragging him down to the station for an exchange of words is, shall we say, an overreaction. And subsequent events proved him right. Why were the charges dropped? Even if you accept, 100%, the version of events that Crowley put in his report, it does not add up to disorderly conduct , and so therefore there was no case there.
However, please note that no one is talking about Gates as hero who did nothing wrong and who has been "vinidcated".
In conclusion: I am not saying that there are racists in the Republican Party and no racists in the Democratic Party. I am saying that there are racists in the Republican Party, at very high levels - including the defacto leadership members Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. These idiots now play the role that Jessee Jackson and Al Sharpton used to play for the Democrats - possibly they appeal to part of the base, but at the same time they make the party's public face unpalatable for the electorate as a whole.
Obama didn't denounce Farrakan
Obama didn't denounce Farrakan - he denounced his anti-Semitic comments. BIG distinction. What about all his anti white comments? If Farrakan can't be unequivocally denounced, then don't patronize us with the nuance.
You still have made no credible case for Wilson's alleged racism. you skip right over to the part where he should drawn and quartered. You simply assume he must be, so therefore he is. Standard liberalism.
Really? Without arguing the premise that Limbaugh and Beck are the "defacto leadership" of the Republican Party, (you liberals love to say that) what have either of them said that proves their racism? Vehement disagreement with a person of color doesn't qualify. Neither does citing someone else's opinion who can't substantiate that opinion. Please don't just insert your subjective opinion here as you did with Wilson.
I suppose he could have gone further
Yes Obama could have gone further in condemnation of Farrakan....however, he still when a hell of a lot further than Boehner who said that Wilson's reprimend for his gross breach of decorum was just a waste of time.
Bullshit. I have made a hell of a better case for the prosecution that you have for the defense, since you have offered absolutely nothing. See what I posted above, since you seem to have "forgotten":
Again, bullshit. I did not say that Limbaugh and Beck are the "defacto leadership" of the Republican Party. I said they were "defacto leadership members". Do you really want to argue that Limbaugh and Beck have less influence on general direction than Boehner, Cantor, Steele et al?
My proof: for Limbaugh, it is "Barack the Magic Negro", the school bus thing, and any number of other things he has said over the years. For Beck, it is the claim that Obama has demonstrated "over and over again" he is "a guy who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture"
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/fox-host-glenn-beck-obama_n_246310.html
Boehner isn't the president
Boehner isn't the president and Wilson isn't Farakan. Besides, the bigger point is that there are reames of evidence that Farrakan is a racist, and nothing to support that Wilson is. You keep saying there is as though you have proved a point. You have proved nothing.
Since we are apparently playing Perry Mason, keep in mind that the defense needs to prove nothing. We all know it is nearly impossible to prove a negative. To wit, prove to all of us that you are not racist. Your "evidence" is inadmissable due to its irrelevance. Your Honor, I move to dismiss.
Limbaugh parodied an op-ed piece written by David Ehrenstein in the L.A. Times on March 17, 2007 entitled "Obama the Magic Negro". Rush was making fun of the absurdity of the left, which is what he does. Quite well I might add. Part of that piece...
So blame your leftist pals at the L.A Times for that one, not Limbaugh. As for Beck, while I may have used different language, Obama has demonstrated a disdain, even comtempt, for white people. See police reference above and his reference to his own grandmother as a "typical (racist) white person".
Sorry Mead, you're still batting zero. I notice you haven't defended Carter. Good for you.
You've responded without answering
True but pointless. Obama and Farakan = the former calls out the latter on his unacceptable statements. Boehner and Wilson = the former seeks to protect the latter from the consequences of his unacceptable conduct.
This is what I am talking about when I talk about not coddling racists.
The court of public opinion denies your motion to dismiss, and finds that the defendant has gone from holding a safe seat to being behind in the polls because Independent voters are turning on him.
The tortured explanation of why "Barack the Magic Nego" wasn't really racist does not become any more credible no matter how many times it is repeated.
And this also ties to my point - don't coddle racists. If something needs a lengthy explanation of why it is acceptable - don't go there, because you can't count on swing voters to follow you through the twists and turns.
Limbaugh, Beck = Sharpton, Jackson. Total turn-off for key voting blocks.
Mead50, like all good liberals, u can see into the heart & soul?
Really, Mead50? Even tho his family, his friends, the people he's known for 35 years, the people he's served with in govt for 20 yrs, the blacks and asians and hispanics who voted for him in the last two elections don't think he's a racist.
They know him. You don't.
But your opinion trumps all of that because... what... because as a liberal you can see into the heart and soul of men and you just sense he's a racist?
Mead50, I think you're a bigot. I think you're a short-sighted, often wrong, pandering liar who is desperate to defend the American Left because you think your country and countrymen have done everything wrong these last 8 yrs. I think, in your own heart, you hate America and you hate what loyal, public servants like Joe Wilson --a decorated Army Colonel by the way-- stand for: service above self, loyalty to the Country, military honor and religious core values.
But I base my assessment of you on what you've written here and elsewhere.
While you don't know Joe Wilson, Mead50, we do know you from your comments here. You're as false a choice here as Obama is in Washington and for that reason alone you're losing the fight on most of the policies choices you thought were your right to enforce because of Obama's temporary election to office. Remember, Obama can't win without the support of his voter frauding thugs from ACORN and, now, even BarneyFrank is calling for federal funds to be cut off to that collection of far Left trolls at ACORN.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27518.html
Newsflash: Jimmy Carter is still a disgrace.
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/09/15/jimmy-carter-is-an-un-american
Barney Frank wants Obama to lose?
So, it is your belief that Barney Frank wants Obama to lose the next election? Interesting....
I don't need to peer into Wilson's heart and soul - like any adult, I am capable of judging a person by his words, deeds, prior conduct, and the circumstances.
I'm sure lots of friends and family of Mark Sanford would come forward to say what a great family man he is, and a great Christian, but that isn't going to change my opinion of him as a scumbag hypocrite who is probably in need of psychiatric help.
Mead50, that ploy might work at the DailyKos...
but people here are a lot smarter than the usual brand of Village Idiots you travel and commune with on a daily basis.
No, I didn't say Barney Frank wanted Barry Obama to lose. I said that ACORN --which you and your liberally lying friends have been protecting for 5-6-7 years now-- had even lost the support of uber-liberal, uber-slimey, poster boi for the real estate meltdown Barney Frank. Even that massive turd from Massachusetts got religion on ACORN.
I also pointed out that Barry Obama couldn't have won without the direct, voter registration frauding efforts of ACORN in 30+ Democrat dominated big cities.
Try keeping the dots in sight, the lines a wee bit straighter and even you will be able, with time and after you've developed a skill set, to connect the dots... to help you develop your skill set, here's a good book for reference, research. It sure beats your DailyKos repeats here.
Get back to us after you complete Book 4, ok?
Out come the insults and the cartoons
I wonder why?
Not an insult nor a cartoon, Mead50...
Just an accurate assessment of how badly you've botched repeated policy debates on this site in the last few days...Remember, the thread's theme was about why Jimmy Carter is a national disgrace and, arguably, the Worst President ever.
You'd like to spin it off into some personalized, below the belt debate. You guys always do. But at the end of the day, your lies and misstatements come back to haunt you.
You've put yourself into an indefensible position, just like your sock-puppet Classic Liberal Democrat 2. You can't defend Jimmy Carters' horrible mistake in painting all opponents to ObamaCare as racists and that's the truth.
I think you and your sock puppet pal belong on the Froot Loops box... after all, you guys did contend that judicial scholar and esteemed federal judge Bork belonged on the Quaker Oats box, no?
Can I remind you that you started this thread?
Can I remind you that you started this thread about 15 posts ago....and did not mention Jimmy Carter?
ACORN reality check
Number of votes known to have been cast as a result of "direct voter registration frauding efforts of ACORN" in ANY city: 0
Number of documented "direct voter frauding efforts of ACORN": 0
ACORN pays people to register voters. Sometimes, those people rip them off, turning in phony registrations for the money. ACORN is a victim of these acts, not the perpetrators of them, and whenever they learn of it, they turn in the indviduals involved. Nearly all of the criminal cases that have been opened were a consequence of ACORN having reported this activity to authorities. Among those fired in the Bush administration's U.S. Attorney scandal was David Iglesias, who was put on Karl Rove's hit list because he refused to manufacture a phony case against ACORN for which there was no evidence (corrupt officials in various states have tried that same stunt).
For examples of real voter registration fraud campaigns, Google the name "Nathan Sproul."
Two guys start yelling in a bar...
Billy and Frank, two deer hunters, are talking smack about their latest adventures in the woods, when Billy says he bagged a 10-pt stag and Frank calls him a liar. People wait to see what Billy's reaction is. The bar is dead quiet. Out of nowhere, the bartender cries "Frank hates all deer hunters."
The next thing you know, everyone starts debating whether Frank hates Billy because of that incident with the loaded shotgun, and if the season should be shortened, and even whether deer hunting should be outlawed... but...
It's smoke and mirrors people. You see, it doesn't matter what Frank's motivation was in calling Billy a liar - what really matters here is: did Billy really bag that deer as he said he did.
Wilson called Obama a liar because he did lie. Poor Jimmy (aka the bartender) who had his own agenda when he made his public statement.
Don't go on losing sight of the bigger picture here.