stuckincincy Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Carter: Elections conducted better in other countries than U.S. March 26, 2001 "Web posted at: 8:21 p.m. EST (0121 GMT) By Linda Petty CNN.com Senior Writer ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that the United States does not have an acceptable democratic system because voting systems vary so much between the 4,000 counties within the country. "There's no way really for us to have any uniformity, no way to guarantee that voters' decisions will be counted accurately and there is no way to educate, in advance, a system of voters, say in a particular area like around Atlanta, because we probably have got 10 different ways to vote in this immediate television coverage (area)," Carter said." There he goes again. "Certifies" that voting in Venezuela - shootings, murder, intimidation etc. as being fair. But no so for Florida. What a joke - his hands drip with blood - his failures in Iran and N. Korea. And his much-ballyhooed "Habit fot Humanity" occupants have a mortgage default rate somewhere around 50%, I believe...
Mickey Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Carter: Elections conducted better in other countries than U.S. March 26, 2001 "Web posted at: 8:21 p.m. EST (0121 GMT) By Linda Petty CNN.com Senior Writer ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that the United States does not have an acceptable democratic system because voting systems vary so much between the 4,000 counties within the country. "There's no way really for us to have any uniformity, no way to guarantee that voters' decisions will be counted accurately and there is no way to educate, in advance, a system of voters, say in a particular area like around Atlanta, because we probably have got 10 different ways to vote in this immediate television coverage (area)," Carter said." There he goes again. "Certifies" that voting in Venezuela - shootings, murder, intimidation etc. as being fair. But no so for Florida. What a joke - his hands drip with blood - his failures in Iran and N. Korea. And his much-ballyhooed "Habit fot Humanity" occupants have a mortgage default rate somewhere around 50%, I believe... 48341[/snapback] Yeah, Habitat for Humanity sux. All those poor people getting houses, how terrible. Can our nation get any lower? By the way, rather than rely on your "belief" I ran a quick search, Habitat for Humanity has less than a 1% mortgage default rate: HFH Mortgage Rate Below 1% Default rate in Detroit is 20% but less than 1% nationwide HFH default rate in US is .7% Also, the mortgage is held by HFH so that if there is a default, they get the house and sell it to another qualifying family. Did you know that HFH families are taken off the HUD list? This is one of those terrible, terrible situations where volunteers come up with a program that works better than the government program and saves tax dollars. I can see why you are so eager to slam it. I hear Carter also likes apple pie, must be something wrong with that too. As for the elections, is Carter wrong when he says that we have inconsistent procedures from state to state and county to county? Has he been asked to "certify" any elections in the US and refused or are you just assuming that since he pointed out the very real problems in our system and since he ok'd elections at one point in Venez. then he would therefore not certify, if asked, an election in the US?
pdh1 Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Yeah, Habitat for Humanity sux. All those poor people getting houses, how terrible. Can our nation get any lower? By the way, rather than rely on your "belief" I ran a quick search, Habitat for Humanity has less than a 1% mortgage default rate: HFH Mortgage Rate Below 1% Default rate in Detroit is 20% but less than 1% nationwide HFH default rate in US is .7% Also, the mortgage is held by HFH so that if there is a default, they get the house and sell it to another qualifying family. Did you know that HFH families are taken off the HUD list? This is one of those terrible, terrible situations where volunteers come up with a program that works better than the government program and saves tax dollars. I can see why you are so eager to slam it. I hear Carter also likes apple pie, must be something wrong with that too. As for the elections, is Carter wrong when he says that we have inconsistent procedures from state to state and county to county? Has he been asked to "certify" any elections in the US and refused or are you just assuming that since he pointed out the very real problems in our system and since he ok'd elections at one point in Venez. then he would therefore not certify, if asked, an election in the US? 48506[/snapback] Why doesn't Habitat for Humanity focus on renovating older houses? Seems to me it would save a lot more trees and land. Not really what you folks were talking about, but I just wanted to know if anyone had the answer.
stuckincincy Posted September 28, 2004 Author Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) Yeah, Habitat for Humanity sux. All those poor people getting houses, how terrible. Can our nation get any lower? By the way, rather than rely on your "belief" I ran a quick search, Habitat for Humanity has less than a 1% mortgage default rate: HFH Mortgage Rate Below 1% Default rate in Detroit is 20% but less than 1% nationwide HFH default rate in US is .7% Also, the mortgage is held by HFH so that if there is a default, they get the house and sell it to another qualifying family. Did you know that HFH families are taken off the HUD list? This is one of those terrible, terrible situations where volunteers come up with a program that works better than the government program and saves tax dollars. I can see why you are so eager to slam it. I hear Carter also likes apple pie, must be something wrong with that too. As for the elections, is Carter wrong when he says that we have inconsistent procedures from state to state and county to county? Has he been asked to "certify" any elections in the US and refused or are you just assuming that since he pointed out the very real problems in our system and since he ok'd elections at one point in Venez. then he would therefore not certify, if asked, an election in the US? 48506[/snapback] OK. My belief is reduced to 20% as far as Detriot is concerned. Pretty sad with HFH holding the paper and I have to guess they bend over backwards to not publicize their warts. So you trust the Peanut to certify Venezuela elections but denigrate US elections. Wow. How can you live in the United States? You forgot to comment about his lack of backing for the Shah of Iran. Guess the current bunch there are much better and aren't developing nukes with the aid of some nations Mr. Kerry wants to kowtow to. Sell your house, give the profits away, move into 1000 square feet, and donate all your income save 30K and I'll respect your feelings for the downtrodden a whole lot more. But that's the classic Liberal cry.."Other people's money must help the poor, but not mine". Move to Hollywood. EDIT: That was harsh and overreaching. Sorry. Edited September 28, 2004 by stuckincincy
Mickey Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 OK. My belief is reduced to 20% as far as Detriot is concerned. Pretty sad with HFH holding the paper and I have to guess they bend over backwards to not publicize their warts. So you trust the Peanut to certify Venezuela elections but denigrate US elections. Wow. How can you live in the United States? You forgot to comment about his lack of backing for the Shah of Iran. Guess the current bunch there are much better and aren't developing nukes with the aid of some nations Mr. Kerry wants to kowtow to. Sell your house, give the profits away, move into 1000 square feet, and donate all your income save 30K and I'll respect your feelings for the downtrodden a whole lot more. But that's the classic Liberal cry.."Other people's money must help the poor, but not mine". Move to Hollywood. 48571[/snapback] I was unaware that you were looking to enter in to a debate over all aspects, good and bad, of the life of Jimmy Carter. Silly me, I confined my remarks to the issues you raised, ie, his recent critique of electon procedures and your slam on HFH. Perhaps after taking a beating on the bogus complaints you raised your only way out wat to bring up a whole new critique of Carter with the remark about the Shah. Lets go back to your original comments shall we? Although the default rate in Detroit is 20%, it is less than 1% nationwide so your comment that their default rate was 50% "only" overstated the facts by 49. Some would call that a lie but I'll be charitable and assume you were simply too lazy to bother checking whatever right wing nut job spoon fed you that factoid. As for the rare defaults that do occur, the housing goes right back to HFH who then finds another deserving family who makes better financial choices so ultimately, the housing goes to people who care enough to keep it. Your hatred of Carter is so deep that you couldn't even resist going after his support for this charity which, by virtually all accounts besides your own, does good work for good people. It is the very kind of charitable program that most right wingers applaud as the viable alternative to government programs for the poor. All I can tell, from your initial post anyway, is that Carter at one time "certified" an election in Venez. He now raises some issues with regard to the patchwork of election laws and procedures in the US. It appears that you then combine these two facts in your head to reach all sorts of conclusions about Carter's position on elections in the US. Has Carter ever said that elections are more fair in Venez? Has he been asked to "certify" the results of an election in the US and because of the procedures refused to do so? If the answer to those questions is "no", upon what do you base your assertions about Carter thinking that elections in Venez are better? While we are at it, what in the world do you know about election laws and procedures in Venez. that you are so sure it is absolutely impossible for them to have a pretty decent system or at least one that might be a smidgeon better than the one in Florida? In your head you seem to think this is a contest of patriotism, that if I love my country I can't possibly consider even a remote chance that another democracy may have stumbled on a better way to count a vote than squinting at hanging chads. Your party, for the most part, has absolutely nothing good to say about the government's ability to accomplish even the simplest task. Why then is it so unpatriotic to consider that maybe we should put "counting votes" on the long list of things the government doesn't do very well?
MichFan Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Your party, for the most part, has absolutely nothing good to say about the government's ability to accomplish even the simplest task. Why then is it so unpatriotic to consider that maybe we should put "counting votes" on the long list of things the government doesn't do very well? Since when does the Federal government count votes? As for the elections, is Carter wrong when he says that we have inconsistent procedures from state to state and county to county? No. But he is wrong to derive from this that "the United States does not have an acceptable democratic system because voting systems vary so much between the 4,000 counties within the country". The United States is a representative republic that uses the electoral college to decide presidential elections. Each state makes their own decision. As long as each state treats each person's vote equally, they can use an whatever voting system(s) they want. It is contigent upon the individual to accurately use the system provided and if they are confused to ask for assistance. Carter put his foot in his mouth on this one and I am frankly disgusted with the man for giving credibility to blatantly crooked elections for "peace's sake" and then questioning our elections. Jimmy Carter -- :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: . You'll couldn't even carry Reagan's jock and you never will be able to. We had enough misery during your 4 years as president. You did us up the rear in N. Korea. You are a walking, talking foreign relations disaster. Enough already. Just leave us the heck alone.
stuckincincy Posted September 28, 2004 Author Posted September 28, 2004 I was unaware that you were looking to enter in to a debate over all aspects, good and bad, of the life of Jimmy Carter. Silly me, I confined my remarks to the issues you raised, ie, his recent critique of electon procedures and your slam on HFH. Perhaps after taking a beating on the bogus complaints you raised your only way out wat to bring up a whole new critique of Carter with the remark about the Shah. Lets go back to your original comments shall we? Although the default rate in Detroit is 20%, it is less than 1% nationwide so your comment that their default rate was 50% "only" overstated the facts by 49. Some would call that a lie but I'll be charitable and assume you were simply too lazy to bother checking whatever right wing nut job spoon fed you that factoid. As for the rare defaults that do occur, the housing goes right back to HFH who then finds another deserving family who makes better financial choices so ultimately, the housing goes to people who care enough to keep it. Your hatred of Carter is so deep that you couldn't even resist going after his support for this charity which, by virtually all accounts besides your own, does good work for good people. It is the very kind of charitable program that most right wingers applaud as the viable alternative to government programs for the poor. All I can tell, from your initial post anyway, is that Carter at one time "certified" an election in Venez. He now raises some issues with regard to the patchwork of election laws and procedures in the US. It appears that you then combine these two facts in your head to reach all sorts of conclusions about Carter's position on elections in the US. Has Carter ever said that elections are more fair in Venez? Has he been asked to "certify" the results of an election in the US and because of the procedures refused to do so? If the answer to those questions is "no", upon what do you base your assertions about Carter thinking that elections in Venez are better? While we are at it, what in the world do you know about election laws and procedures in Venez. that you are so sure it is absolutely impossible for them to have a pretty decent system or at least one that might be a smidgeon better than the one in Florida? In your head you seem to think this is a contest of patriotism, that if I love my country I can't possibly consider even a remote chance that another democracy may have stumbled on a better way to count a vote than squinting at hanging chads. Your party, for the most part, has absolutely nothing good to say about the government's ability to accomplish even the simplest task. Why then is it so unpatriotic to consider that maybe we should put "counting votes" on the long list of things the government doesn't do very well? 48621[/snapback] What do you think about people who actually making an active effort to go and register instead of those who are solicited via "motor voter" and "bring out the vote" campaigns? I guess Cook County never happened. Or Ciggies in Wisconsin in 2000. You seem to believe that if a citizen (or not) has no brains or concepts he is an equal participant in the governance of the nation. Do you honestly want a government elected by such? I think you do. I know lawyers do - a reason why they run to Mississipi to try cases. Very nice. Winning $$$ trumps having an informed jury, eh? So much for ideals... I still disagree with your HFH references...they are a sacred cow. My info was based on local investigative reporting, and, no, I cannot provide to you endless electronic proofs. You win. Long post on your part. Tell me, exactly, what my party is?
Lori Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Why doesn't Habitat for Humanity focus on renovating older houses? Seems to me it would save a lot more trees and land. Not really what you folks were talking about, but I just wanted to know if anyone had the answer. 48520[/snapback] Where did you get the idea they don't? OK, now that I think about it, photo-ops like Blitz Builds, the JCWP, Building on Faith do get most of the publicity. But whether they're building new homes or rehabilitating old ones depends a lot on the housing/land situation from affiliate to affiliate. Out here in the sticks, our local affiliates do both. And to be realistic, if you're figuring up costs of ripping out/re-doing wiring, plumbing, insulation, all that, it might just be more cost-effective to build new. (And the standard Habitat house design isn't exactly spacious - no more than 1,050 sq. feet of living space for a new-built 3-bedroom here in the States. To compare, my house - nice, but not quite palatial - is 1,800 sq ft not counting the basement.) Remember, too, that HFH has corporate partnerships with many building-industry companies, and gets a lot of construction material donated. The HFH website has fact sheets, house designs, things like that, if anyone is interested in learning more. Oh yeah, and a way to get in touch with your local affiliate....
pdh1 Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Where did you get the idea they don't?OK, now that I think about it, photo-ops like Blitz Builds, the JCWP, Building on Faith do get most of the publicity. But whether they're building new homes or rehabilitating old ones depends a lot on the housing/land situation from affiliate to affiliate. Out here in the sticks, our local affiliates do both. And to be realistic, if you're figuring up costs of ripping out/re-doing wiring, plumbing, insulation, all that, it might just be more cost-effective to build new. (And the standard Habitat house design isn't exactly spacious - no more than 1,050 sq. feet of living space for a new-built 3-bedroom here in the States. To compare, my house - nice, but not quite palatial - is 1,800 sq ft not counting the basement.) Remember, too, that HFH has corporate partnerships with many building-industry companies, and gets a lot of construction material donated. The HFH website has fact sheets, house designs, things like that, if anyone is interested in learning more. Oh yeah, and a way to get in touch with your local affiliate.... 48671[/snapback] Thanks for the info. I did a promitional video for them once for free (shooting and editing stuff). The house I was filming for them was brand new. When I drove down there to film, there were all these abandoned tobacco warehouses down the road that would seem like a good place to remodel. A couple years a construction bought them for pennies on the dollar, and now rent them out hip, expensive apartments for young professional types. I wasn't just think of the cost, but the space as well.
TPS Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Carter put his foot in his mouth on this one and I am frankly disgusted with the man for giving credibility to blatantly crooked elections for "peace's sake" and then questioning our elections. Jimmy Carter -- :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: . You'll couldn't even carry Reagan's jock and you never will be able to. We had enough misery during your 4 years as president. You did us up the rear in N. Korea. You are a walking, talking foreign relations disaster. Enough already. Just leave us the heck alone. 48643[/snapback] Another rightwing non-fact checking homer. Real average growth rates of GDP under the last six administrations: Nixon/Ford= 2.6% Carter= 3.3% Reagan= 3.4% Bush1= 2.1% Clinton= 3.7% Bush2= 1.9% Such misery under Carter. Looks like we need the prosperity the Bushes offer....
Chef Jim Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Another rightwing non-fact checking homer. Real average growth rates of GDP under the last six administrations: Nixon/Ford= 2.6% Carter= 3.3% Reagan= 3.4% Bush1= 2.1% Clinton= 3.7% Bush2= 1.9% Such misery under Carter. Looks like we need the prosperity the Bushes offer.... 48815[/snapback] GDP has nothing to do with whose president and visa versa. So those numbers really mean nothing at all.
DC Tom Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Another rightwing non-fact checking homer. Real average growth rates of GDP under the last six administrations: Nixon/Ford= 2.6% Carter= 3.3% Reagan= 3.4% Bush1= 2.1% Clinton= 3.7% Bush2= 1.9% Such misery under Carter. Looks like we need the prosperity the Bushes offer.... 48815[/snapback] I was six when Carter took office, but even I remember double-digit interest rates, inflation, and unemployment late in his term. But I guess that doesn't matter. It must have been one grand old party in America with a simple four-year average GDP growth of 3.4%...
MichFan Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Another rightwing non-fact checking homer. Real average growth rates of GDP under the last six administrations: Nixon/Ford= 2.6% Carter= 3.3% Reagan= 3.4% Bush1= 2.1% Clinton= 3.7% Bush2= 1.9% Such misery under Carter. Looks like we need the prosperity the Bushes offer.... Any credibility you may have ever had is instantly shot when you try to defend the Carter economy. I doubt even the staunchest libs on this board will try to defend you on this one. If I'm a right-wing homer then you surely are a left-wing lunatic.
TPS Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 GDP has nothing to do with whose president and visa versa. So those numbers really mean nothing at all. 48827[/snapback] So you would argue that the original poster is wrong then? Since the president can't impact GDP and the economy in general?
Chef Jim Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 So you would argue that the original poster is wrong then? Since the president can't impact GDP and the economy in general? 48893[/snapback] Kind of hard to argue that seeing the original poster mentioned nothing at all about the economy.
TPS Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 I was six when Carter took office, but even I remember double-digit interest rates, inflation, and unemployment late in his term. But I guess that doesn't matter. It must have been one grand old party in America with a simple four-year average GDP growth of 3.4%... 48872[/snapback] Maybe you are mixing your memories with Reagan's term. Yes, after the second OPEC oil embargo (Carter's fault?) inflation and interest rates increased, especially toward the end of 1979 and into 1980. However, UP never was never higher than 7.8% under Carter, whereas it hit over 11% under Reagan. As for GDP, those are real growth rate figures. That means even though inflation was relatively high (I don't believe it reached double digits), most people's incomes kept pace, and even grew faster than prices. No, it wasn't like the 1960s or 1990s, but when you compare most statistics that we use to measure how well the economy performed, Carter ranks in the middle with Reagan. The difference is there was a lower average UP rate under Carter, but a lower average inflation rate under REagan. Real GDP growth was about the same, as I posted.
Lori Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 I was six when Carter took office, but even I remember double-digit interest rates, inflation, and unemployment late in his term. But I guess that doesn't matter. It must have been one grand old party in America with a simple four-year average GDP growth of 3.4%... 48872[/snapback] Likewise. I was 8. And living through the Carter era (on a lot of tuna casserole and PBJs) did a darn good job of steering me toward the GOP.
TPS Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Any credibility you may have ever had is instantly shot when you try to defend the Carter economy. I doubt even the staunchest libs on this board will try to defend you on this one. If I'm a right-wing homer then you surely are a left-wing lunatic. 48879[/snapback] What would you say are the most important economic statistics when measuring economic performance?
TPS Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Likewise. I was 8. And living through the Carter era (on a lot of tuna casserole and PBJs) did a darn good job of steering me toward the GOP. 48915[/snapback] Geez, I can't fight those kinds of arguments: memories of 6 and 8 year olds. how'd you do during Reagan's recession in 1981 and 82, when unemployment was over 10%? Can you remember that?
TPS Posted September 29, 2004 Posted September 29, 2004 Kind of hard to argue that seeing the original poster mentioned nothing at all about the economy. 48897[/snapback] Got me.
Recommended Posts