Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said:

He was a good guy and I have to believe he is going to heaven for his good intentions and efforts, but he was completely ineffective. 

 

He was a good guy, but we don't hire people becasue they are good guys.

We hire them because they can do the appointed task.

As president, he couldn't and he didn't, and he did real damage.

Posted (edited)

Seemed like a guy who lived by his values, his values included outreach and helping others.  Over a lifespan of 100 years in public service, you're likely to have some fans and some detractors.   His presidency was what it was, largely panned by both sides of the aisle, but from an achievement perspective, he spent a bit of time as the most powerful man in the world.  There is that. 

 

Plus, doing all that as the first Little Person President is really something.

 

image.png.83790c24e6d0b8de7d4850cadad06402.png

Edited by leh-nerd skin-erd
Posted

He was a much better and effective president than the simplistic media portrays him. He laid the economic ground work for the Reagan years and started the deregulation of industry while also taking the sensible step of vetoing the B-1 because it had already been made obsolete by new technology, an example Trump should take good note of!

 

Using a "Good Government" standard of judging Jimmy Carter, he rates pretty high in this boring but important category. The best way to judge a person is by comparing them to people who lived at the same time they did. So while James Earl Carter had an almost perfect record of non-corruption and such, you could not say the same of two other presidents who were contemporaneous  of Carter. It's frightful to think that good, honest Jimmy Carter shared a decade as President with that criminal Richard Nixon. Scores of Nixon administration officials were frog marched away to jail for crimes both obscene and inane.  It was like a criminal enterprise.

 

Good thing Carter came along so we wouldn't see that anymo... oh wait. The Reagan administration seemed to wonder right back into those criminal ways, though not nearly as bad as Nixon's WH. But still, it's as if Ronnie was asleep at the wheel, zzzz

 

Judging by administrations that preceded his by a few years and one that immediately followed his, Carter ran a clean ship.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
15 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

A fine and decent man who served his country with honor.

In retrospect, I see him as a transitional president. He was a more of a break with liberal Democrats of the late 60s and early 70s than a continuation. He started the wave of deregulation that hit its stride under Reagan, and his response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan put an end to the Democratic Party illusion that the Soviet system and the U.S. system could coexist indefinitely. 

RIP, Jimmy.

The more maga pud posts and right wing “great guy…but hold my beer while I piss on his grave” articles get posted… 

They are all the same ….baseless qualitative slanted views from a president who was dealt a truly crap economy started under Nixon, a country ravaged by GOP corruption, told the country not to be so dependent on oil, told some necessary truths about Israel, got shelled for financing Chrysler when GWB financed the entire financial sector and took the hit for the cia overthrow of an Iranian govt 20 years prior

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

He was a much better and effective president than the simplistic media portrays him. He laid the economic ground work for the Reagan years ......

 

It isn't the simplistic media that portrays his as a failure.

He was a gross failure.

 

He didn't "lay the groundwork for the Reagan years."

 

He laid the example for how not to run things, that Reagan instinctively  knew, as gov of Cal.

 

He was a disingenuous phony and failure as president, who was decent afterwards.

 

Stupid "election verification" status. I never understood how that had any credibility.

Very bad re Israel, but he did great work for Habitat.   

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TH3 said:

The more maga pud posts and right wing “great guy…but hold my beer while I piss on his grave” articles get posted… 

They are all the same ….baseless qualitative slanted views from a president who was dealt a truly crap economy started under Nixon, a country ravaged by GOP corruption, told the country not to be so dependent on oil, told some necessary truths about Israel, got shelled for financing Chrysler when GWB financed the entire financial sector and took the hit for the cia overthrow of an Iranian govt 20 years prior

The reality T is that the guy lived, he loved, he lead, he retired and he died after a full and long life.  There's no 'pissing on his grave'---people have feelings about his leadership or lack thereof.  Let the politicians and talking heads do their thing and reinvent or reimagine the guy as they see fit, and if it aligns with your worldview, embrace it.  If not, it's all fair game. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, sherpa said:

 

He was a good guy, but we don't hire people becasue they are good guys.

We hire them because they can do the appointed task.

As president, he couldn't and he didn't, and he did real damage.

I agree with your point and part of what I am trying to point out, that your president has to be willing to be the villain to the other countries 

1 hour ago, TH3 said:

The more maga pud posts and right wing “great guy…but hold my beer while I piss on his grave” articles get posted… 

They are all the same ….baseless qualitative slanted views from a president who was dealt a truly crap economy started under Nixon, a country ravaged by GOP corruption, told the country not to be so dependent on oil, told some necessary truths about Israel, got shelled for financing Chrysler when GWB financed the entire financial sector and took the hit for the cia overthrow of an Iranian govt 20 years prior

I was born during his presidency so I will not argue I have any memory of his time but what successes did he have at all? The media portrays it was loss after loss for the US and put allies.

Posted
1 hour ago, TH3 said:

The more maga pud posts and right wing “great guy…but hold my beer while I piss on his grave” articles get posted… 

They are all the same ….baseless qualitative slanted views from a president who was dealt a truly crap economy started under Nixon, a country ravaged by GOP corruption, told the country not to be so dependent on oil, told some necessary truths about Israel, got shelled for financing Chrysler when GWB financed the entire financial sector and took the hit for the cia overthrow of an Iranian govt 20 years prior

Your first sentence, which is obviously quite childish, leads me to believe you were not around to experience the wonders of the Jimmy Carter presidency. It was a hoot. You really missed out. 

Posted
7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Seemed like a guy who lived by his values, his values included outreach and helping others.  Over a lifespan of 100 years in public service, you're likely to have some fans and some detractors.   His presidency was what it was, largely panned by both sides of the aisle, but from an achievement perspective, he spent a bit of time as the most powerful man in the world.  There is that. 

 

Plus, doing all that as the first Little Person President is really something.

 

image.png.83790c24e6d0b8de7d4850cadad06402.png

2 ½ of the people in this photo are now dead.

  • Shocked 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted (edited)

For those that weren't around or have no knowledge of the economic situation during the Carter term, to claim that he "laid the economic ground work for the Reagan yeas" is preposterous.

During the Carter Admin, the term "misery index" originated, which was combining very high interest rates with annual inflation figures, and it exceeded 20%.

 

What laid the economic ground work for the Reagan expansion was a hawk Fed Chairman, Paul Volker, who kept Fed Funds and the Discount Rate high during Reagan's first two years and eventually brought things down to levels that led to investment, confidence and growth.

 

You could buy guaranteed bonds for 12% in those days. Crazy.

And please, don't claim that because it was Carter who appointed Volker he somehow deserves credit for this.

The man was an economic, military, leadership, and confidence disaster.

 

What he did do, which is seemingly anathema to the Biden group, is occasionally admit responsibility for failure.

Edited by sherpa
  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
4 hours ago, sherpa said:

For those that weren't around or have no knowledge of the economic situation during the Carter term, to claim that he "laid the economic ground work for the Reagan yeas" is preposterous.

During the Carter Admin, the term "misery index" originated, which was combining very high interest rates with annual inflation figures, and it exceeded 20%.

 

What laid the economic ground work for the Reagan expansion was a hawk Fed Chairman, Paul Volker, who kept Fed Funds and the Discount Rate high during Reagan's first two years and eventually brought things down to levels that led to investment, confidence and growth.

 

You could buy guaranteed bonds for 12% in those days. Crazy.

And please, don't claim that because it was Carter who appointed Volker he somehow deserves credit for this.

The man was an economic, military, leadership, and confidence disaster.

 

What he did do, which is seemingly anathema to the Biden group, is occasionally admit responsibility for failure.

A bit off the topic of his  Presidency, but declaring a national day of mourning and closing the federal government is pretty obnoxious.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
21 hours ago, Wacka said:

Even now at this minute, he is more intelligent than Biden.

 

Even though each of their times in office might be comparable as 2 of the worst but Carter as a person will be held in a much better light than Joe ...

Posted

Carter sure proved one thing, you go against Big Oil and the propaganda machine will be turned against you. Carter dared to ask Americans to reduce energy consumption, horrible! Big oil and the media lame brains made that a liability. It was not Carter's fault that this great energy producing nation imported so much energy. At least he did something about it, helping to reduce our use and imports of energy. Better economy, more domestic energy. Carter, a Good government guy, in an era of corruption(Nixon/Reagan) who also stood up to big oil and made us cleaner, more efficient and independent. 50% decline in foreign imports after his administration's policies. That's results! 

 

He got it that we really don't need gasoline. <---ya really. 

 

He was a pretty Conservative Democrat really. Cut government spending to help stop inflation, but too little too late. 

 

He was just a victim of circumstances. He inherited stagflation which basically passed, had great economic growth and the Iran blew up. Like Reagan, Carter had hostages to deal with and neither did particularly well.  At least Carter got his people out alive, and did not have the sad spectacle Reagan had with Beirut and all those dead Marines. 

 

He was not a great politician, like Reagan was, and the media will never forgive that! 

 

 

@Irv Probably enjoying an early New Years over this. Sad! 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Tibs. I was alive during his presidency.  Do you remember the way you were allowed to buy gas was based on the last digit on your license plate.  Odd days and even days.  Hope to God you didn’t run out on an even day if your plate ended in an odd number.  WTF.  
 

“What a mess” originated with this guy.  Good guy.  Awful politician and leader.  RIP. 
 

 

Edited by Irv
Posted
3 minutes ago, Irv said:

I was alive during his presidency.  Does anybody remember the way you were allowed to buy gas was based on the last digit on your license plate.  Odd days and even days.  WTF.  
 

“What a mess” originated with this guy.  Good guy.  Awful politician and leader.  RIP. 

Oh, buy a moped! 

 

image.png.8bd2fea2958d941ff3c1445a13d082d9.png

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

He was just a victim of circumstances. 

 

 

He wasn't a "victim of circumstances," he was a victim of his incredible naivete and bad instincts, and being a phony.

I remember quite well when he ruled that all military spaces must reduce their thermostat s to 65 degrees.

We froze our butts off trying to work and live in that. Just stupid. Everyone wearing coats all day long inside, and at night when you were the duty officer.

Late addition. He also mandated that all thermostats be changed on a specific date, so 65 in the winter, I don't remember the summer setting for AC. Didn't matter what was going on in your area weather wise, you simply had to do it,

Pure idiocy.

None of that was as bad as his hands on issues with the military.

Atrocious commander in chief, not even aware of the issues.

Stupid, and unwanted negotiator of the Agreed to Framework with North Korea which guaranteed them a nuclear weapon, and that was done outside the approval or even knowledge of the Clinton Admin.

 

Edited by sherpa
×
×
  • Create New...