recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
About Gather |
Engagement Marketing |
Gather Points |
Advertise on Gather |
Gather Press |
Privacy |
Terms of Service |
Community Guidelines
Books | Business | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Giveaways | Health | Money | Moms | News | Politics | Sports | Style | Technology | Travel | Writing
Books | Business | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Giveaways | Health | Money | Moms | News | Politics | Sports | Style | Technology | Travel | Writing
Version 18247, "Zach"; Copyright © 2013 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.
Comments: 74
Weeealllll...
Carter was probably the smartest man ever to hold the office, but now we see that managerial skills are much more important than unused raw intelligence.
Refute anything I just said 2 comments up. You can't.
And Ron, you know as well as I do that it isn't about me - its just politics. Don't get your panties in such a wad.
Don't you recall the 21% interest rates, 10% unemployment, and the 1979 gas crisis? True, Carter didn't cause ALL of that. But he reacted poorly to all three, just when America needed leadership. And then the idiot goes and boycotts the Olympics in Moscow...........what a buffoon! We could have waltzed in with our superior swim team, track team, basketball team, and taken all the gold medals.............and made the Soviets look like the losers they were. But no, Carter boycotted instead. He may have been smart, but he wasn't exactly the greatest tactical thinker around.
Like I said above, he's a good man while he's quietly swinging a hammer for Habitat for Humanity............but let the thinking be done by others that are better at the game.
Please follow your own advice, because your analysis leaves a lot to be desired. You'd take your brain out and play with it, if you had one, wouldn't you?
It isn't about me. How many times do I have to say that?
You're reaching for non-existent material here...........again.
Carter ran his administration into the ground because he was too smart for his own good. And without a lot of managerial skill. But that wasn't his worst offenses.
- He had no backbone.
- He was a Socialist, down to the core.
- He was naive, to the detriment of the country.
Still, I believe he had a good heart, and still does. He just wasn't cut out to be a President. He was too gentle.
So he should have let the thinking be done by others that are better at the game than he was. Yet another reason why he was obliterated by Reagan just a few short years later. Ron, I didn't say Reagan was smarter than Carter. I said he was better at thinking.............and better at playing the game, which he undoubtedly was.
You have to make a case before you can rest your case.
Or do you get paid BEFORE you do your work too?
I only provide a stage for you to pontificate. Then you do a horrible tap dance around the facts until the long cane comes out from behind the curtain to pull you off by your neck.
If we had only listened to Jimmy Carter..............
- the hostages would still be in Iran
- Hezbollah would have a PAC, and actively lobby Congress
- oil would be $500 per barrel
- interest rates would still be in the Usury range (20%+)
- our GDP would be in the toilet
- everyone in this country would be working for a foreign company
- all US business would have packed up and moved out
- we'd be in constant recession
- Hoovervilles (Cartervilles, maybe?) would dot the Washington DC landscape
- Habitat for Humanity would be the largest "employer" in the country
- Habitat for Humanity would be the largest homebuilder in the US
- Israel would now be called Palestine
- Jews would be in the second phase of "the Diaspora"
That's why Reagan won in a landslide in 1980.
Carter and his failed ideas were repudiated by an angry electorate.
Carter's many, many problems stemmed from him being too nice. He just didn't have the backbone to stand up to our enemies. He was super-smart, but that just wasn't enough. And since America learned its lesson after experiencing his brand of Liberal politics, we haven't made the same mistake since.
Reagan's blow-out of Carter was so overwhelming because of Carter's weakness. Reagan showed strength and leadership when America was in really bad shape. It was amazing how quickly he righted Carter's foundering ship..........and the country loved him for it. Even Democrats.
It's far more wise to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
- stolen from Mark Twain, but appropriate for you, Ron.
I zinged you with it. Suck it up.
You got stomped. Now swallow your pride and move along. Back to the topic of your own article might be nice.
Jimmy Carter.
A good man, not a good President.
You're 100% right about Presidential integrity. Its why Mr. Bush is not enjoying the plurality he had before 2004.
Integrity is why Reagan was beloved. He stuck to Conservative principles.
Personal Integrity is why we still tolerate Carter. He has a good heart. But he is reviled as the leader of this country in his short, painful 4 years.
Integrity is why we chuckle when Bill Clinton's name is uttered. His DNA all over Monica's blue dress..............has there been any less personal integrity displayed?
Carter was basically overthrown, and his policies repudiated. But it wasn't because Carter was evil...........he wasn't. He just didn't react well to events that occurred in his short, painful 4 years. The takeover of the Iranian embassy was the seminal event in his Presidency. He could have showed strength and unified the country. Instead, his mishandling of the hostage crisis was the final nail in his coffin. So, in essence, you're right.
The Reagan Revolution pushed Carter out to pasture.
Just to clear up something you said earlier that was wrong :
In November 1979, when the hostage crisis happened in Iran, Ronald Reagan was just another Republican candidate............and not even the favorite to win. George H.W. Bush was the favorite. Campaigning had only just begun.
No helicopter parts were sold, or given to Iran prior to the hostages being released. However, the timing of the hostages' release and Reagan's January 20, 1981 inauguration gave the impression of "behind-the-scenes" negotiating...........which of course, was happening : Reagan was threatening the Iranians with various coercive measures - and they were terrified. And they had a right to be terrified of Reagan.....LOL.
God has better, more worthy people to go after.....lol.
Lying, Ron? Like I've said so many, many times before, if you have something that refutes what I said above, produce it. Otherwise, open your mouth and insert your foot........again. Try some mustard on that boot, it will probably reduce the gamey flavor.
He showed all the strength he had control of, and ordered a rescue mission that, if successful, would have made him the hero he deserved to be. The military blew that mission, not Carter, and I've often wondered if there wasn't some collusion by the military there, as well. They seemed to be singularly ineffective and it was a comedy of errors, not in the planning, but in the execution. Coincidence, maybe, further Machiavellian Bush action, maybe, as well, in my mind.
"The Reagan Revolution pushed Carter out to pasture."
Can't argue there, but the reasons why are where I disagree.
"In November 1979, when the hostage crisis happened in Iran, Ronald Reagan was just another Republican candidate............and not even the favorite to win. George H.W. Bush was the favorite. Campaigning had only just begun."
When it began, yes, that, of course was not the case by the time George Bush was witnessed in Paris meeting with Iranians.
"No helicopter parts were sold, or given to Iran prior to the hostages being released."
Gee, I wonder why? Maybe because they didn't have control of the military till he was inaugurated? How dumb do you think people are? To get access to that stockpile of helicopter parts, they had to be in office, (I tried hard not to add this, but I just had to) Moron.
"However, the timing of the hostages' release and Reagan's January 20, 1981 inauguration gave the impression of "behind-the-scenes" negotiating"
Geez, do you think? Duh!
"..which of course, was happening : Reagan was threatening the Iranians with various coercive measures - and they were terrified. And they had a right to be terrified of Reagan.....LOL."
What a tool. He was threatening them with sucking their d**k you mean.
"When it began, yes, that, of course was not the case by the time George Bush was witnessed in Paris meeting with Iranians."
What year was that, Ron?
Think of the timeline. Mr. Reagan was sworn in as President on Jan. 20, 1981.
Bret : "No helicopter parts were sold, or given to Iran prior to the hostages being released."
Ron : Gee, I wonder why? Maybe because they didn't have control of the military till he was inaugurated? How dumb do you think people are? To get access to that stockpile of helicopter parts, they had to be in office, (I tried hard not to add this, but I just had to) Moron."
8 comments up, you said this :
"Integrity is important in the office of the president to the rest of us, and he had tons more than that a**hole Reagan that stole the election from him by selling helicopter parts to Iran, against the law, by the way."
You lied on Gather, Ron. Admit it. I caught you red-handed. Here's the proof.
You said that Reagan "stole the election by selling helicopter parts to Iran".
Your own link states that this did not happen. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it. You lied, and that is clear now. Even your own link proves the evidence :
"In 1992-93, a House Task Force conducted an investigation of the controversy and judged the allegations of a (pre-election) Republican-Iranian deal to be false."
Try not to spread rumors that are false. I expect to see most of your nonsense on Snopes.com being debunked, however.
"In 1992-93, a House Task Force conducted a half-hearted investigation of the controversy and judged the allegations of a Republican-Iranian deal to be false. But it was later discovered that the Task Force had concealed evidence that pointed in the opposite direction, including a classified report from the Russian government stating that Bush, Casey and CIA officers had met with Iranians in Europe in 1980 to strike a deal."
Don't you get tired of being found out in your obfuscation attempts, or embarrassed by your ignorance of the facts as you were in the case of Impeachments? I can't really understand how you continue to spew your BS nonstop without realizing what a tool you are. You speak, and Gather laughs.
You said that Reagan "stole" the election by selling helicopter parts to Iran. That would have been quite a feat of bluffing by someone who wasn't the President yet. How could someone who wasn't even the President make such a commitment? Either the Iranians got bluffed, or it simply didn't happen.
We now know, however, that this didn't happen. How? The House investigation in '92-'93. Your link proved that already.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Google : Was Clinton Impeached?
Then read the answers. It should be illuminating for you.
You lied, and you know it. Now you're caught. Just admit it and move along. I'll let you go peacefully if you do. Otherwise I'll keep allowing you to dig your hole to China. LOL
You lied and said Mr. Reagan won the 1980 election by supplying helicopter parts to Iran. He couldn't possibly have done that, as you and I both know. I've already proved that above.
Mr. Reagan's Conservative message destroyed Carter's Liberal message. The proof was the previous 4 years. In the end, it was a landslide. But hey, Ron, if you want to be a historical revisionist, don't expect the rest of the world to believe you or take you seriously.
Behave like an adult and you'll be treated like one. Continue on like you've been doing and you'll continue to sit at the short table.
I'm a shocked as you Angela . . . he was great and people haven't recognized it . . . and he's been the greatest Former President of all. Very Cool.
Ron . . . you're wallowing with Bert? Can't you find something better to do than trying to have an intelligent conversation with a RepubliCON who registered as a Democrat and is (presumably) working the books for his local party? How high up the ranks can a RepubliCON climb in the Democratic Party . . . do ya' figure? Now . . . get up out of the gutter and stop plaing with Bert . . . dust yourself OFF man . . . I'd rather have an optional root canal than a conversation with him. LoL!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
He doesn't have any choice when I call him a liar. He doesn't have any proof to back up his absurd claims.............and I'm definitely not going to let him up for air....LOL.
As far as your points whoring goes, there's only one answer to that :
Conservatives have always enjoyed humor at the expense of uptight Libs. I'm just continuing the tradition. Just be thankful we don't hunt you........lol. I'd pair you up with Dick Cheney.
Bam!
Ron wakes up in the hospital.
Said as drops of Night Train dribbles down Ron's scruffy, unkempt beard full of Cheetos. Undoubtedly, you'd have turned out differently, if only we'd listened to Jimmy Carter.........lol.
Every hobo has a dog.
Wash your beard, then go retrieve your Home Depot certificates. Contributing certificates to you is better than having you reach in my pocket.
And Ron, you gave up the discussion after I nuked you with the hobo image. After that, you've just been trying to hang on with weak, ineffective semi-insults.
Yes, right, you are the Borg, and I have been ass-imilated. At least you make me laugh, sometimes, Bretboy. We will kill you last, when you are defeated.
No, you're an ant and I just stepped on you. Now your goo is all over the bottom of my shoe. And Ron, WE won't be defeated. We think long term, we're well financed, and we have a game plan that reaches out for decades. You have none of that............and that is why you always lose.
And that is why your Left Wing will lose again in November.
Ron, your face has absorbed too many blows for me to continue on this thread. My knuckles hurt, and I feel badly for you.
My prediction : you won't reach 100, once I leave...........unless you pull some dirty points-whoring tricks....lol. I won't put that past you.
Living in Georgia, I have had the opportunity to see Carter's 'work' up close and personal. I actually worked on his election campaign while a college student at Notre Dame/Holy Cross! How is that for dating me? ;-)
Before Jimmy carter, no one even used the words 'human rights.' Tying funding into human rights records has pissed off more politicians and greedy people than I could ever hope to piss off! So, I admire him for making govt foreign funding have some conscience.
So, how can a "socialist" crazy person like me say: "think about McCain?" (hint: thats why they call me crazy ;-)
Its not about the party, its about the person.....in folks like Carter. He was probably the last president to actually read everything that he signed.....and became a bit of a bottle neck as a result. Everyone seems to have a beef about him.....but facts is facts. The world is a better place due to his existence.
Thats all any of us can hope is said about our lives, eh?
So pissing people off, by talking about stuff they want to ignore/deny? Oh welll.....
:-)