Worst Ex President of US Ever Exceeds Expectations

[vol_scouter 365]

Pack,

 

Sorry, I am unsure where certain lines are and therefore I will say no more.

[packsaddle 753]

Artjrk, I seem to remember Clinton and GHW Bush joining to gain international relief support for victims of Katrina, the Indonesia tsunami, and the Haiti earthquake. I suspect they're continuing their collaboration and their international involvement.

 

vol_scouter, I have no idea what lines you're talking about...but as you wish.

 

Scoutfish, sorry, I misunderstood your intent.

[Scoutfish 16]

That's cool!

 

What I am thinking, how I put it into words, how your read it, and the way you interpret it are 4 different things.

 

Of course I know what I meant. Trick is.....did I explain it in a way as to make sure others understand.

 

I ain't taking sides with the Jimmy issue...truth be told, I just don't have a vested interest in it to have any deep knowledge,

 

My only point was just because a government says something wasn't "offical", doesn't mean they are not behind it.

 

Example: Government special operations, anything to do with the CIA, and my work dealing with a non existant group that could maybe possibly be called Delta Force..assuming they even existed...which they do not!

 

[SR540Beaver 116]

BrentAllen: "One thing you can say about Carter - he never met a dictator he didn't like."

 

Yes, and Reagan sold arms to Iran. Your point?

[BrentAllen 10]

You really want to compare Carter to Reagan? The Reagan that defeated Carter in one of the biggest landslides in the history of our country? OK, go ahead.

 

Carter's support of Robert Mugabe:

 

"The Boston Globe reported in December, 1979 that "Carter Administration officials feel they have scored a major foreign policy success in Rhodesia." (Zimbabwe was formerly known as Rhodesia). The purported success was a settlement that set the stage for Mugabe's rise to power. This was months after the Washington Post described him as a "scholarly, avowed Marxist."

 

In August, 1980, Carter's former UN ambassador Andrew Young wrote in the Washington Post of "Mugabe's Endorsement:"

 

The president's best investment of the past four years has just begun to pay off. The visit of Zimbabwe's Prime Minister Robert Mugabe sparked an enthusiasm in black America that may well rekindle the fires that Jimmy Carter so desperately needs for reelection.

 

Here is a president, being questioned by the liberal wing of his own party for supposedly abandoning his commitment to human rights at home and abroad, suddenly receiving accolades from Robert Mugabe -- Africa's "black diamond" -- for making a truly non-racial democracy possible in southern Africa."

 

Of course, we all know how that has turned out.

 

You can read about Carter's role in helping Castro and Chavez here:

 

http://vcrisis.com/index.php?content=letters/200408310659

 

Carter makes Neville Chamberlain look brilliant.

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Carter went from the White House to Habitat for Humanity, Reagan went from the White House to a blatant money gathering tour pimping ouf the office of the president.

 

As president, I think Carter ranks with the worst, as an Ex-president, I think he ranks with the best. He has done more with his life than feed cattle and think warm thoughts, and golf

 

He behavior can't always be explained however

[BadenP 93]

OGE

I think your comparison is a little one sided and inaccurate. You know a lot of people have worked with Habitat for Humanity which is a great organization but does not make someone a candidate for sainthood. Reagan was in his eighties when he left the Presidency, well liked by both Republicans and Democrats and highly sought out for public speaking events, Carter frankly was looked upon as a failure as president for a number of reasons, the hostage crisis, the failed economy, a corrupt cabinet, the worst since President Grant, and lets not forget the killer rabbit attack. The sad truth after one term in office the American people just wanted to forget about Carter, and if not for his work with Habitat for Humanity would have slipped away into obscurity

[SR540Beaver 116]

Brent,

 

Do you remember the Iranian hostage situation? Iran was a theocratic dictator regime who held our embassy staff hostage for over 400 days. What did Reagan do? He sold them arms. He armed our enemy. I'm not justifying Carter's relationship with dicators, I just want a little fair and balanced perspective. Presidents know and deal with things we can't even imagine and end up doing things that make no sense to us outside the loop. That includes Reagan.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

I think Jimmy Carter's biggest failing was that he expected everyone to be as dedicated to doing the right thing as he was and he had no idea how Washington really ran, his presidency is an example what really happens when you send an honest man (and a tad naive) to Washington. They get chewed up and spit out

 

He was the classic Sunday School teacher who has no concept of how to deal with unruly children

[skeptic 991]

OGE; I totally agree. Great characterization. And, from that perspective, I can see similarities to Obama. He too entered office with high expectations of doing things he felt important and worthwhile; but he really was not prepared for the gridlock of the Washington hierarchy. The difference is likely in his response and continuing struggle to adjust and find other ways.

 

Our country's current problems, as has been noted many times, are not the fault of one president. Most of the worst issues have developed over at least 20 to 30 years, and just simply came to head at the end of the Bush II era and continued to explode into the current administration. It certainly does not help that our so called representatives mostly still do not have a clue, and simply continue to posture and refuse to find middle ground.

 

JMHO

[BrentAllen 10]

There is still questions about whether Reagan actually knew the arms sales were going on. They happened under his watch, so he has to take some of the blame. I also don't forget that this was taking place to try to free some of our hostages. Arming our future enemies has taken place before (Afghanistan & Bin Ladin), and may well now be happening in Libya. I don't like it, but when we get involved in the affairs of other countries and choose sides, we shouldn't be surprised that it does.

 

You can still go attend Carter's Sunday School class and even take your Scouts, if he isn't off having dinner with some evil dictator. Troops around here do it occassionally. Check dates at http://www.mbcplains.org/ Me, I'll pass.

 

My ancestors bought property from Carter's ancestors, I believe it was just after the Civil War. The properties ajoin. I grew up hunting deer right across the street from the Carter family cemetery. My mother worked under Carter when he was governor, right before he was elected president. Neither of my parents voted for him. I've been on Habitat builds with him; he would probably be a nice neighbor. He amazes me in that the only evil he can see in the world is in the Republican Party and in Israel. Don't forget about his book and subsequent apology to the Jews (when his grandson decided to run for office in an area heavily populated by Jews).

[Lisabob 13]

Pick a president since WWII who didn't deal with dictators. Good luck with that. They all did/do. THe nasty reality of pursuing national interest is that sometimes, you make very unlikely and uneasy alliances. That doesn't always make it right and we can debate what is/isn't 'national interest' til the cows come home, because there is no single, objective, definition.

 

But if you're all upset about Carter dealing with dictators, you'd better be equally upset with just about every one of our post-war presidents. It has little to do with party affiliation.

[BrentAllen 10]

Sorry, Lisa, but Carter goes out of his way to do it. Sure, others may have had to deal with them while in office, but few have continued to cozy up to them once they left office.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

From what I unerstand, oddly enough, even ex-presidents have the freedom of speech and if in their elder years they begin questionable behavior, it doesn't change what they did. OJ Simpson was one heck of a running back, a guilty one now, but still one heck of one

[eisely 13]

I have been out scouting over the weekend and away from my computer for some time. In no way did I expect the kind of response or interest in this topic.

 

Former presidents should stay out of the lime light. George W. Bush is the better exemplar of post presidential behavior, even as his successor continued to blame him for everything. Truman, Eisenhower, Reagan, GHW Bush, Nixon, LBJ and Ford all offer far better examples of post WWII non interference in the affairs of the nation after they left office.

 

In a post several years ago in this forum I commented that Carter should have stuck to his Habitat for Humanity work and I still feel that way. I don't know how much official blessing ahead of time Carter may have had for his various attempts at private diplomacy, but I am inclined to believe that he has largely gone off on his own. The entire notion of "private diplomacy" is a bit of an oxymoron when one thinks about it.

 

It is one thing when the sitting president calls you, the former president, up and asks you to do something like lead a relief effort. It is entirely different when a sitting president supposedly contracts out an important piece of foreign policy to an ex president. It doesn't make sense to me that any president, including Obama, would welcome the kind of free lance activities of Carter.

 

Carter never seems to have gotten over the fact that he failed at re election in a landslide. Reasons for voter dissatisfaction at the time: the state of the economy, the continuing humiliation of the Iran hostage crisis, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which took Carter completely by surprise.