The Jimmy Carter Legacy

by: BonnieBlueFlag

As I read this columnist's opinion of Jimmy Carter, his presidential legacy, and his busy body behavior during his retirement years on a Canadian News site, I began to see how the chaos of the Carter years had indeed taken us from the frying pan to the fire.

"THE TROUBLE WITH CARTER"
by Klaus Rohrich

Jimmy Carter, the peanut farmer and former U.S. President, has a huge problem: his mouth. The things emanating from that orifice are bizarre in the extreme, considering that Carter was arguably the worst president in the history of the United States. His most recent foot-in-mouth episode involves his running commentary on George W. Bush’s veracity, and the "atrocities" committed by American soldiers in the war on terrorism. Carter maintains that had the U.S. not waged war against the Taliban who were sponsors of Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network, or deposed Saddam Hussein, then the Islamic terrorists would have no excuse for attacking the West.

To say this sentiment is naive is charitable, given Carter’s history of extreme failure as America’s 39th president. For those too young to remember, under Carter’s tenure in the White House inflation and interest rates rose to their highest levels since the Second World War. In 1978 interest rates of 20 percent were not unheard of, as Carter dithered with the U.S. economy. It was also under Carter’s watch that Iranian fundamentalist Muslims took 66 American diplomats hostage and held them for 444 days, while Carter was powerless to do anything but posture.

It is ironic that this happened, as Carter was directly responsible for the Ayatollah Khomeini’s takeover of Iran. Carter had decided that Mohammed Reza Palavi, the Shah of Iran and a committed friend of the United States, wasn’t democratic enough for Carter’s taste. As a result, Carter insisted the Shah democratize his regime, the result of which was the takeover of Iran by the Ayatollah when the Shah left Iran for cancer treatment in the U.S.

More ironically still, the takeover of Iran by the Islamic fundamentalists emboldened Saddam Hussein, who had just begun his tenure as absolute dictator of Iraq. Believing that the departure of the Shah and the chilling of American/Iranian relations would render Iran ripe for an invasion, Saddam attacked Iran in hopes of securing that country’s oil fields and deposing the Shia Muslim theocracy there. The result was that over 1,000,000 men died during that conflict, which remained at a stalemate for years.

Had Carter not been instrumental in deposing the Shah, then Saddam would likely have remained a bit player in the region, which might have resulted in greater stability.

In 2002, Carter was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development." This sounds to me like it may have been the booby prize, given that Carter actually never accomplished anything concrete that resulted in the resolution of international conflicts, the advancement of democracy or even the promotion of economic and social development. Quite the opposite, as under Carter’s reign the "misery index," which was Carter’s own invention (leave it to a Democrat to focus on misery), climbed by over 50 percent! But then, we have to remember that the Nobel Peace prize also went to Yassar Arafat, the notorious murderer who is responsible for thousands of deaths, both among Israelis as well as Palestinians.

It’s so characteristic of Democrats in the U.S. to take total failures, flunkies who accomplish less than nothing, and elevate them to some mythical pantheon of liberal heroes because they had good intentions. My grandmother used to tell me that the road to hell was paved with them.

Rather than trying to score political points with those who are trying to kill us, Jimmy Carter might be well advised to read some history. I strongly recommend European history between, say, 1930 and 1945. There are some wonderful lessons to be learned in the comparison between Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill. The former, Like Jimmy Carter, wanted to appease the enemy, while the latter, Like George Bush, took steps to defend his country.

Toronto Free Press

Mr. Rohrich's summation of Jimmy Carter's lack of accomplishments is excellent, however, he does not mention one of Carter's most important and most dangerous contributions to the world, Kim Jong Il and his growing nuclear arsenal.

Perhaps if Bill Clinton had not been so eager, to let someone else take care of the difficult N. Korean situation, thereby extending the Jimmy Carter legacy, George Bush would have one less crisis to deal with today.

I admit to having voted for Jimmy Carter, and I do apologize for having done so, he was the last Democrat for whom I have ever voted, but I did so, because he was a southern farmer, not because he was a southern Democrat. We had voted for someone who should have known the plight of the American farmer, someone who should have helped them, instead he set the stage for the loss of a great many family farms, sending them into bankruptcy.

Carter whined that he had no control over the 16% plus inflation rate, and a prime interest rate that reached 21.5% in December of 1980. He should have known first hand, how different farming economics were from those of people receiving weekly paychecks.

One of the very first things that GW Bush did after his inauguration, was to alleviate some of the problems that had evolved, between farming income and banking practices.

Jimmy Carter should get off the stage, he only serves to make Bill Clinton's behavior passable by comparison. He left office more than 24 years ago, and we continue to live under the menacing shadow of the Carter presidency.

Written by: BonnieBlueFlag

COMMENTS:

Timothy Birdnow said...
Bravo, Bonnie!

That post exposes Carter for the incompetent boob he is and was!

Keynsian economists told Carter that inflation and stagnant economic growth could not coexist, and Carter instituted wage and price controls while growing government programs by printing more money. As a result, the World witnessed what the Keynsians said was impossible; Stagflation!

His moonbeam foreign policy is directly responsible for the current rise of radical Islam, yet he dares to chastise President Bush and the Republicans! The man is a worm!

Carter should stick to building houses with Habitat for Humanity; when it comes to anything else, he is the Craftsman of Tools!


Billy D said...
"Worst President ever"
Comic book Guy from "The Simpsons"

Aussiegirl said...

Agreed, great post by Bonnie as usual. And Tim is so right, it Was Carter's starry-eyed view of the Ayatollah Khomeini as some sort of latter day Bible-thumping Baptist born-again redeemer that led him to betray the Shah by insisting that the Ayatollah be allowed back into Iran. The predictable happened, the Shah fell, and Iran, which had been a prosperous, secular and western-oriented country fell into the dark ages of Sharia law and ruthless mullahcracy. It now poses a major threat to the world with its stated goal of acquiring nuclear weapons and waging global jihad.

The Bush administration has also been derelict in not actively engaging pro-western and pro-democracy forces to overthrow these mullahs from within. Now it is too late, we have a thug and a killer in charge. Ahmanijad will stop at nothing to get what he wants. Add to that the Panama Canal, North Korea, etc. etc. -- and this is perhaps the most dangerous man America has ever produced after Benedict Arnold, who, if you think about it, seems like a saint by comparison -- although there too -- part of Arnold's problem was personal pride and arrogance - he felt that he had been overlooked and underappreciated. That's fundamentally Jimmy's problem -- he thinks too much of himself. His sin isn't lusting in his heart after women - it's pride and arrogance.