Dave’s Quote of the Day - Obama/Carter edition
“America elected Jimmy Carter 32 years ago and is still paying the price. Suppose history repeats: Obama wins and has a failed one-term presidency. Will he be jetting around the world meeting with terrorists and despots and denouncing America in 2040? Maybe not, but the thought gives us a shudder.”
Just out of curisoity Dave, in your opinion, who was worse… Bush or Carter?
Comment by Andre the Defiant — May 8, 2008 @ 10:33 pm
It obviously depends on what you are talking about. Take foreign policy, inflation, unemployment, gas lines, America’s strength in the world etc. and Bush still beats Carter. Yep, he was really that bad.
Comment by Dave - the Infidel Sage — May 8, 2008 @ 10:42 pm
Well, he inherited the inflation and the policies that led to the gas lines, I would dispute your line about influence in the world, and on foreign policy, do you seriously think Carter was worse? He was bad, yes, but at least he had a few high points. Bush has been a complete disaster.
Comment by Andre the Defiant — May 8, 2008 @ 10:48 pm
Remember that whole Shiite Islamist takeover of Iran followed by hundreds of agonizing days of the hostage crisis…??? We are still dealing with that crap. You’re just mad Bush invaded Iraq and therefore he’s worse etc. Does anybody think Carter did a good job? You never hear dems saying, “boy I wish for the good ol’ days of Carter”.
Comment by Dave - the Infidel Sage — May 8, 2008 @ 10:53 pm
So the Shiite takeover was Carter’s fault? Nothing at all to do with our role in propping up the previous government. And when the helicopters crashed in route on their rescue mission, I assume that was Carter’s fault, too?
Comment by Andre the Defiant — May 8, 2008 @ 10:56 pm
Seriously. What was he to do, go in and wipe out the Shah’s political enemies for him?
Comment by Wes — May 8, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
Don’t be silly Wes. He should have illegaly sold the scary Islamo-Whatevuhs high-tech weapons in order to fund anti-commie programs in our own hemisphere, and then had everyone lie in front of Congress about it. That would have made him a GREAT president (obligatory note: I still like and respect Reagan, and he is still the best president in my lifetime, but that was a low point in his administration).
Comment by Andre the Defiant — May 8, 2008 @ 11:19 pm
Carter’s biggest mistake was to attempt to balance the budget instead of borrowing a trillion dollars in order to fight undeclared wars in the middle east. Then he kept speaking english in full sentences and telling people that they would be better off driving smaller cars and living in houses with better insulation. Shit, he even thought that it was reasonable to pay for every American to live under a roof rather than throwing them into the streets and leaving houses empty.
Freaking elitist that.
btw-How was your heating oil bill last winter? GM stock still working for you?
Comment by John P. — May 9, 2008 @ 1:30 am
You guys are funny, keep up the Carter defenses and we’ll soon have enough material for our own Conclub comedy tour…
Comment by Dave - the Infidel Sage — May 9, 2008 @ 7:07 am
Anyone who believes Carter was a good President and then defends his failed policies and actions is clearly a moron and has no business commenting on current affairs of State. It is almost embarrassing having to set you three idiots straight and yet it is impossible to argue with those who actually believe that the economy is as bad now as it was in the late 1970’s. When John P. says “shit, he even thought that it was reasonable to pay for every American to live under a roof rather than throwing them into the streets and leaving houses empty” he only demonstrates what a child he actually is. And because Andre agrees with him, he too is a mere child in a mans world.
Comment by E the Wise — May 9, 2008 @ 7:34 am
Carter may have been a bad president, but of all the presidents in the past 40 years, I would dare say he is the only one that I would consider and honorable, genuine Christian soul.
The guy is a true humanitarian and believes in peacemaking over war. Make fun of his failed policies all you want, but his heart was in the right place when it came to giving of himself. He did (and still does) practice a path of peace and compassion no matter what the public opinion of him. The man he worships did the same thing. I have to admire him for that and will always respect his character.
Bush/Cheney will go down as the worse presidential period in American history for many reasons. Bush can barely pronounce “compassion” much less practice it.
Comment by Drowning Creek — May 9, 2008 @ 8:18 am
Figures - Dave posts something about Carter and Obama - then the three dwarves Andre, Wes and Jeff turn it into a referendum on Bush. DFV was right, this has become a joke.
I can not tell just how happy it makes me that Bush drives you crazy. There are a hundred plus countries in the world. They all have their interests and concerns. The world is a very complicated place. Instead of trying to discover what is happening these guys comprehensive geopolitical overview consists of blaming Bush for EVERYTHING.
Jeff has honed his brilliant view of history to such an edge he can not tell the difference between losing and quitting when it comes to war. You praising Carter for his Christian principles is fitting Jeff. Jimmy Carter, the LSD dude, and Ron Paul - you know how to pick them.
CORRECTION: Wes did not mention Bush for once. It was that twit John P. I would apologize to Wes - but what the hell - I am sure he was thinking it!
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 8:43 am
I have heard this about every president during my lifetime. You should have heard what they said about Nixon. It is a statement a prudent person does not make as it is nonsensical. You can not claim historical perspective without, ahhh without, ahhh lets see, oh yeah - Historical Perspective!
Like I said, I have heard it many times. I do have say that Carter is the only one I still hear it about. Dick Nixon has a much better rep than Jimmy.
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 9:05 am
Beast – I hold you responsible for the arrival of the clevernista, as it was your post that attracted him. It would not be so bad except he seems constitutionally unable to make a point.
Insulting someone is being argumentative; which is not the same as making an argument. Hell even a jackass like me knows that. Is this guy Bill Maher or his kid? Is this is what passes for critical thinking these days? Don’t answer that – it is rhetorical.
I wonder if there is a 12 step program for uncontrollable snarking. If so there are a few candidates around here. Keep in mind that the first step is admitting you have a problem
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 9:55 am
Pg, mea culpa.
What happened was WordPress put up “Dartmouth Prof To Sue Students” on its “Hawt Posts” scroll at the homepage. That attracted a ton of readers who are also WordPress bloggers - hence more likely to leave comments (and links) than readers from (for example) Free Republic.
Sorry to thread-hijack, Dave.
Comment by hairybeast — May 9, 2008 @ 10:01 am
All in fun Beast. The more the funnier?
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 10:23 am
Yes, exactly. What’s better for a blog - tons of readers who never comment or link or fewer readers who do comment and link? Personally, the Beast was getting a bit tired of beating up on Wes. It’s good to see him posting again, and ditto Andre. They were a bit outnumbered and if readers come in from outside to bolster them, than that’s a healthy sign. Perhaps we’ll get that third Lefty blogger after all.
Comment by hairybeast — May 9, 2008 @ 10:28 am
The difference between Jimmy Carter and George Bush is the difference between estrogen and testosterone. When presented with an act of war, President Carter chose to wring his hands and dither and then tell the Iranians how bad and mean they were.
What he should have done is to inform the Iranians that any Americans held captive in Iran seventy-two hours from a specified time would be considered casualties of war, true heroes of the United States, and that Tehran and Qom would wind up glowing in the dark without electricity, unless every last one of those hostages was on a plane, out of Iranian territory, by the time the deadline was reached.
It was Mr Carter’s weakness in a moment when strength was required which helped persuade foreign dictators that yes, the United States could be trifled with, and no serious consequences would befall the triflers. This plagued Bill Clinton as well: it was the perception that American Democratic presidents would do nothing that enabled the first terrorist attacks during his administration, and his continual lack of resolve and effective response which reinforced the impression. Saddam Hussein thought the same thing about the elder George Bush, and it turned out to be something of a miscalculation.
It was defined best in the movie Dr Strangelove: deterrence is the art of producing in the mind of the enemy the fear to attack. Presidents Carter — and later President Clinton — chose diplomacy above deterrence, and the fear to attack no longer existed.
Comment by Dana — May 9, 2008 @ 10:46 am
Somebody can’t do math.
Carter:52 Americans held hostage and released to live their lives. Several dead, everybody forgets how many. Homeless US citizens were unheard of; we didn’t even use the word in 1980. George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan had made a treasonous deal with the Iranian religious junta to exchange weapons to fight Iraq in exchange for holding the hostages until after the election.
Bush: 7,000 Americans dead and counting. Several tens of thousands of US soldiers casualties and permanently disabled. Up to a million Iraqi dead, several million Iraqi refugees. God knows how many Afghans dead. The economy is in shambles and the US dollar is dropping like a mastadon stuck in a tar pit. Homeless people in every city and town in the US and food shortages. FOOD SHORTAGES¡? WTF? A freakin jumbo jet hit the Pentagon on his watch and no heads roll in the Air Farce?
And somebody can still believe that Carter was worse? We shoulda nuked ‘em. Did we take a break from our X-box and learn how to type yesterday?
Comment by John P. — May 9, 2008 @ 2:11 pm
This is not even close to being accurate John. The rest of your details are shaky. No, I am wrong, they are not shaky, they are just made up. In fact it is hard to find anything accurate. You even got the number of hostages wrong. Well at least you are consistent in being inaccurate.
Who has a problem with math? Yeah Beast, this guy is on you.
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
Of course we didn’t call them that, their victimhood had not been invented yet. We sure had them you nitwit. I worked with them in the seventies. We have always had them.
You are a piece of work John/Pangolin, or whatever your name is.
Here are some facts: When Carter left office the prime rate was over 20%, unemployment was over 7%, inflation over 12%. People had FIXED mortgages over 15%. Insurance companies were PAYING 12% on cash value. CD rates were over 13%.
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 4:14 pm
Wow I turn my back for 2 days and look what happens. Things degenerate into … eh who am I kidding? I love this kind of stuff.
For me it boils down to something PG mentioned, perspecitve. He meant in in a different way but bear with me. I want to say that Bush is worse than Carter but that’s because I was a toddler when Carter was done with his disasterous presidency. The last 8 years encompassed most of my twenties until now so I am FAR more informed as to what the hell is going on than I was then.
That being said I find it hard to blame Carter for the turnover of power in Iran to the fundamentalists. He wasn’t the president of Iran. Could he have handled it better and possibly averted the hostage crisis? Absolutely. Did he deal with it effectively? Not at all. I don’t think he a good president by any means Jeff’s comment about him being a good Christian notwithstanding. Being a good guy is neither a job requirement nor necessarily an asset for a US president. Hell Dubya seems like the kind of guy I’d like to go bass fishing with but I think he’s a pretty horrible president too.
Comment by thompaine — May 9, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
When someone rolls out the “a million dead Iraqi” bullshit, I can only roll my eyes and conclude that he/she got their data from MoveOn. These are just made up numbers. Hell, 6 months ago the number used by the left was 500,000. In six months the number changed to a million! What the hell, just make it 5 million next year. I also think the concern for Afghanis is admirable considering they were so safe under the sharia imposed laws of the Taliban!
The economy is in such a shambles that GDP went up .8% last quarter. Imagine the horror! Hell, it’s so bad out there that unemployment is holding steady at just under 5%. Shambles indeed!
Only the left can ratchet up figures in such a way as Andre and Wes and Pangolin and then talk about us having deficiencies in math.
Comment by E the Wise — May 9, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
Feeling better PG? I hate to sound ignorant but what does this - Insurance companies were PAYING 12% on cash value - mean? Sorry but macro econ isn”t my strong suit.
Comment by thompaine — May 9, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
Yes much better Thom, thank you for asking. I was able to type some this afternoon, though I did take a 4 hour nap. My wife typed my morning comments. She gave me a rash of crap for giving Jeff a hard time. Jeff should not worry as I still love him and I will suffer tonight due to all this typing.
Whole life and universal life policies pay interest on the cash value (the savings component of the policy). In context the 12% and above that those policies were paying (their rates are generally tied to the prime) was fantastical. History shows that a 3% - 5% return should be expected. The money earned is tax deferred.
You used perspective in the same context I have been using it. Look I know things seem bad in some ways now. But to give into angst and declare things are the worst is childish. We aren’t even in a depression as it is defined right now, but 90% of Americans ‘think’ we are because they ‘think’ they have been told that.
People believe Bush started something new regarding America’s place in the world. We intervened more in the 10 years before he became president than at anytime in our history. The one thing Bush has done different is that he has never bothered to apologize for doing what he thinks is best. How in the world people decided that we were ever anything but an interventionist country is beyond me. We have meddled in other peoples business from the start. We should have, and if we have any sense we better continue.
Carter along with his foreign policy team went about ‘reforming’ our policy regarding human rights. He deserted the Shah and hundreds of thousands died as a result. Hell the Ayatollah ordered human wave attacks against the Iraqis by children. If the Shah had not fallen Iran would have been too strong for Saddam to attack. Carter’s actions/inactions contributed to destabilizing that region. His ‘doctrine’ had quite a bit to do with the Soviets decision to move on Afghanistan.
No offense meant to anyone, but it is terribly naïve and ignorant to defend Carter’s term. Hell even Camp David had more to do with Sadat than him.
The defense to Dave’s selected quote is – No! Obama will be a success. The answer sure isn’t to rehab Carter’s legacy.
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
Glad to hear you’re feeling better and thanks for the info.
More on this topic later from me as I’m heading out with some friends for a bit but this is an interesting debate. Like McArthur I shall return.
Comment by thompaine — May 9, 2008 @ 6:06 pm
Sorry to intrude; I didn’t realize that this was an echo chamber.
Ok, 53 hostages held in Iran. I said 52, an inexcusable error.
From the Washington Post(those liberals)-”About 1,800 U.S. troops, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, are now suffering from traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) caused by penetrating wounds. But neurologists worry that hundreds of thousands more — at least 30 percent of the troops who’ve engaged in active combat for four months or longer in Iraq and Afghanistan — are at risk of potentially disabling neurological disorders from the blast waves of IEDs and mortars, all without suffering a scratch.”
Look here:Military Releases High Casualty FiguresSullivan points out that the military’s casualty reports also exclude the “enormous number [of new veterans] flooding the VA,” often with medical problems developed due to the war. A January report by the Department of Veterans Affairs showed 299,585 veterans who recently served in the Middle East had been treated by the VA since 2002.
I think 299k military vets seeking treatment after discharge probably includes 10% with some form of disability.
Here it is:”HEALTH-US:Iraq Vets Left in Physical and Mental Agony
By Aaron GlantzSAN FRANCISCO, California, Jan 3 (IPS) - On New Year’s Eve, the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq passed 3,000. By Tuesday, the death toll had reached 3,004 — 31 more than died in the Sep. 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.
But the number of injured has far outstripped the dead, with the Veterans Administration reporting that more than 150,000 veterans of the Iraq war are receiving disability benefits.
Advances in military technology are keeping the death rate much lower than during the Vietnam War and World War Two, Dr. Col. Vito Imbascini, an urologist and state surgeon with the California Army National Guard, told IPS, but soldiers who survive attacks are often severely disabled for life.” (emphasis mine)
That would fit within tens of thousands wouldn’t it?
Iraqi civilian casualties: Original study posted in the peer-reviewed journal Lancet and updated.
January 2008 - Update on Iraqi Casualty Data
Further survey work undertaken by ORB, in association with its research partner IIACSS, confirms our earlier estimate that over 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the conflict which started in 2003.
Or you could believe the figures of the insanely corrupt “Iraqi government” or the Bush administration. (WMD’s?? find those yet)
Hey, at least Bush supports the troops right? There are no homeless veterans right? US citizens forced to sleep in the streets isn’t really a disgrace is it? It’s OK with you?
Jesus wept.
Comment by Pangolin — May 9, 2008 @ 6:14 pm
I like the blame game. We can blame the dems for Vietnam. Do we want to throw out casualty figures for that fiasco too. Geez, it’s Al-Qaeda and Iranian backed militias that are responsible for the vast majority of Iraqi deaths but let’s blame Bush for that as well. You notice how the Left doesn’t talk about the vast mass graves that cover Iraq and the millions dead in the wars and genocides of Saddam. In the end, Iraq will be better for us having removed the Butcher of Baghdad and his ghoulish sons from power. The Kurds all but worship us now and frankly I think they deserve the de facto state they now have in Northern Iraq. At least that wrong has now been righted.
Comment by Dave - the Infidel Sage — May 9, 2008 @ 7:00 pm
Well, you said several tens of thousands left permanently disabled. I might take exception to the “permanent” label (mental traumas and “potentially disabling neurological disorders” aren’t necessarily permanent) but I commend you for your links and facts.
Contrary to your assertion this is no echo chamber. I encourage you to click around and find the myriad of other arguments that involve the conservative members of the site. One such heated debate involves the most serious issue of the impact of the theatrical production Rent.
Comment by E the Wise — May 9, 2008 @ 7:02 pm
Of course blaming the Repubs for gas prices is hilarious. We’ve been all but rioting for more domestic drilling and the building of more refineries for years. Not to mention more aggressive and innovative access to foreign fields being developed for use. Eighty percent of domestic reserves are now off limits for recovery. You can thank the Left for that, not the Right. I’ve also vigorously condemned the horribly misguided (and in the end incredibly wasteful, counterproductive, and polluting production process) ethanol policies which is now helping to ‘fuel’ the world food shortage. I rail against the idiocy that leads to such anti common sense policies. Of course I’m a ‘common sense’ conservative so that would be about par for me to complain about such things.
Comment by Dave - the Infidel Sage — May 9, 2008 @ 7:18 pm
Pangolin I owe you an apology. I am very sorry that you went to the trouble you did. I have no intention of going down this rabbit hole with you Alice. I have had this inane discussion too many times. The data does not support your conclusions.
There might be someone else here who is willing to engage you in this absurdity, I am not him. Try Dana’s site, there might be somebody willing there.
You sound so much like a guy from New Zealand that Dana and I know so well!
I assure you that my views were reach with full knowledge of the information you proffer. Your links are nothing new; they have been posted here many times.
If you seek the truth I would offer a few suggestions. One - look into what goes on in the military. For instance casualty rates reflect non-combat related casualties. This is true for both dead and wounded. Usually it is 20%-30% of deaths and 30%-40% of injuries. Something like 70% of all combat area casualties return to their units within three days. The military like any other large organization has work related disabilities. The vast majority are not combat related. The VA is who vets have their health care through, people see their doctors.
Two - The ’shell-shocked homeless vet’ is a figment of the Liberal political imagination. The homeless you believe exist do not exist in the numbers you believe, or for the reasons you think they do. I do not care what John Edwards says.
Finally - You may believe you seek to empathize with veterans in someway; but you do not. You diminish them.
This is as far as I am willing to go with you. Thank you for your attempts at edification. Goodness knows I needed to bang my head against this wall again.
Comment by pg - your humble messenger — May 9, 2008 @ 7:36 pm
I know you love me PG.
No offense taken. Glad to hear you are feeling better. Tell your wife to not worry about my feelings. I got tough skin, and a hard head.
My views on the world come from an open curious mind. Carter is still an honorable man in book, so is Albert Hofmann and Dr Paul. I hold a great degree of respect for each.
There’s a good chance I’ll get to see Obama drive the conservatives crazy for at least four years. Maybe Carter can be Sect. of State.
Comment by Drowning Creek — May 10, 2008 @ 10:26 am
PG, Carter’s presidential policies were boneheaded at times, so don’t think I’m defending his presidency. I’m just saying he was, and still is a peacemaker hoping the world can sort out it’s problems in a non-violent way. I wished it were true and think if all this religion wasn’t the cause, we would find something else to fight about.
Carter’s recent dealings with Hamas may have just shown him how disagreeable and utterly bullheaded people can be. Sometimes I guess a waving a big stick is the only way to keep people in line, much like Saddam did while ruling Iraq. He just enjoyed using that stick a lot and to excess while thumbing his nose at the world. .
There just isn’t much room in today’s world for real peacemakers that don’t carry a big stick in one hand and brass knucks in the other.
Comment by Drowning Creek — May 10, 2008 @ 10:40 am