Jimmy Carter: Who Cares?
I remember Jimmy Carter as our President. He turned off the lights in the White House to save money. He managed the White House tennis court schedule and initiated a failed rescue plan to free American Embassy employees from their captive state in Iran.
Interest rates on mortgages, under Carter, went through the roof and we were in a major recession by the end of his single term. I remember Jimmy. The Nation sent him back to picking peanuts after 4 years.
Jimmy is back in the news playing the race game in his description of the rising questions concerning Obama’s activity. The radical members of his party love the kind of disparaging remarks Carter has made concerning opposition to the Obama governing moves, being based on racial hatreds. Jimmy must not be very good in Math. Obama was elected by white folks North and South included.
The greatest accomplishment by Obama so far is a demonstration that America is pretty much past the racial bigotry that Carter describes in his recent comments. Carter should be able to do the math. Obama is President because race was a secondary issue in the last election. Black people did not elect Obama they voted for him in large numbers but the larger number were White voters who thought he would be the best choice.
We certainly are not past all areas of bigoted behavior but Carter is in a time freeze if he cannot see that America has moved on and we have a President that is not white. The numbers should be understood by Carter that a candidate needs white Americans to vote for him (or her) to be elected. It is evident to anyone who has followed Obama that he understands the numbers.
Carter should know how this works. If 50% of the voters cast a vote for a candidate they will include all stripes of opinion and racial configuration. Carter has slipped into La La land with his statements about race and the Presidency.
What Obama has demonstrated is that most of America is past race as a determining issue in national elections. That is one issue that Obama settled by being elected.
Carter should understand that in the South, “old times there are not forgotten” but the folks there are ready to look away to a new day where racial questions are not a limiting factor. The Obama pick was perhaps not the right one but it is evident that America has moved to a new level of trust by the electorate that is finally moving past race.
Jimmy might be looking to run for a second term I think that someone should point out to Jimmy that the South is not ready to “Look Away” back to the old days as, it was, when he was in office.
You and your ilk are living proof that America has most certainly NOT moved past racial bigotry. Yes, 70 million voted him into office…. and from the day he was elected, he’s been attacked like none other. Sadly, racism isn’t dead in America. Red State Rednecks make that abundantly clear, time after time after time.
diogenes, he never stated that racism isn’t dead.
“We certainly are not past all areas of bigoted behavior…”
He simply stated that it is not as prevalent of a social issue as it used to be based on the fact that a black man actually managed to get voted into office. If racism was still on par with what it used to be a few decades ago, this would not be the case.
You should probably thoroughly read the post before you jump to conclusions quickly and skim over the rest so that you can rush to the comments section and attempt to start a flame war.
Constantly attacking Buck and “his ilk” for their strong opinions on one side of the fence (the opposite of you) seems awfully hypocritical. I don’t agree with being too radical in any one direction because I feel that it discourages compromise between individuals. You seems just about as radical left as you can get, and attack Buck for being what you believe to be extremely right wing. Interesting.
Thanks Infinity for reasonable comment. diogenes does us all a favor by demonstrating a real danger to our nation.
Unreasoned, narrow, hate filled commentary is disturbing, but our Constitution permits even those like diogenes, who are beyond reason, to voice their opinion.
The statement that Obama has been “attacked like none other” tells it all. Bush set a new record for being attacked and I suspect that diogenes was one of the vicious attackers. Those days have been quickly forgotten by diogenes and “her ilk” in their determination to change our country to their Statist dream.
2010 is coming
Yeah, you’re right, Bushie was attacked with the same visciousness, probably more.
Now, I remember all those radical Lefties threatening the violent overthrow of the goverment. And the Loonies who came to Presidential appearances sporting the latest in firearm fashion.
When Obama invades his first country, we can talk about comparisons with Bushie. And when Biden helps destroy civil liberties like Big Dick Cheney, maybe I’ll concede the two administrations are comparable.
But that ain’t gonna happen, is it?
diogenes, you are attempting to comment on the political future of this country, which is impossible. Any even mild scholar of history will have the realization that presidential administrations are virtually always unpredictable.
Don’t get me wrong here. I voted for Obama in the last election, because I felt that he was the right man for the job considering the country at the time. But I don’t consider myself a democrat, nor do I consider myself a republican. Rather, during elections I think it is best to put my own personal gripes aside and cast a vote for the individual whom I believe is best qualified to handle the situation at hand. And that may be a candidate from a different party each election.
I think that you are living in an idealistic world where Obama is the savior that you’ve been looking for, and Bush was the absolute worst leader that history has seen. This black and white comparison draws a dichotomy that is too far skewed. That view, well that’s called naivety. You have to be realistic and realize that there are several kinds of people in this country and satisfying all of them is incredibly difficult, and may I propose, impossible for ANY president to do. This is simply a reality of our political system. The fact that we have potential for changeover every four years helps to counter-balance this, and come that time, everyone can make their own informed decision about the best course for the country.
Why can’t we talk about comparisons with Bush? Both presidents were attacked, and both are making choices that upset a large majority of the country in different ways. You’ll find that most presidents are more similar than you’d like to believe. Democrats and Republicans really can’t sit too far on either side of the political fence, lest they run the risk of alienating a large portion of their base.
How, exactly, does noting that Obama is being attacked by racists equate, in your mind, that Obama is my “savior”? My comments weren’t defending Obama’s actions, they were attacking the virulent racism exhibited by MANY who oppose him.
And, sorry, just because both Bush and Obama were attacked doesn’t mean they’re comparable. Being attacked for invading another country, and being attacked because racists “want their country back” are two different cases.
The judgment that Obama is your “savior” stems from all of the previous comments that you have made on this site. Any criticism of Obama you seem to take exception to, which is a very close-minded way in which to operate.
From what evidence are you basing that Obama is merely being attacked because racists supposedly want their country back? I can’t criticize Obama without being a racist? That just doesn’t make sense.
People are often times criticizing him because his bail out strategies are half-baked and shortsighted wastes of money in their eyes, and his health care plans are flawed. You know, it is possible for one to disagree with Obama without being called a racist. Sure there are some people that are racist, but that’s a reality that we all have to accept, but by no means does that classify all of Obama’s opponents as radical Republican “racists.”
If you’ve read my other comments, you should know that I’ve said that every criticism of Obama is not race-based. But a large percentage of it is race-based. The watermelons on the White House lawn poster. “The zoo had an African lion and the White House has a Lyin’ African.” The “he was born in Kenya” crap. The “He’s a Muslim” nonsense.
And maybe it is just completely coincidental that the only President in recent memory who’s been called out as a liar in a joint session of Congress was a black man being shouted at by a representative of South Carolina who supported the flying of the Stars and Bars over the State House in South Carolina, as if the War of Northern Aggression had never ended. The same Joe Wilson who told the daughter of Strom Thurmond that she was “smearing” her father’s memory for finally stepping forward after his death to admit that she was Thurmond’s illegitimate daughter from an affair with a black woman. (Yeah, it’s a “smear” to say “He was my father” — but only in a racist’s warped mind.)
Bury your heads in the sand all you want. There is racism in a LOT of this criticism of Obama, and there is definitely racism that’s been exhibited by this particular rightwingnut blogger, Uncle Buck.
If you disagree, you disagree. But trust me when I say it has nothing to do with Obama being my “savior” and has everything to do with the nature of the comments made by Uncle Buck in the past.
diogenes,
There was a movie years ago starring Paul Simon in which I first heard about a one trick pony. It is an expression that describes your contribution to discussions about the national condition. You have the racist cry as your single trick and it a worn out ploy to avoid sensible conversation.
On NPR the other day a very liberal guest commented that the Birthers had some valid points especially concerning the total”embargo” on any records concerning the President”s past history. It was indicated that such an embargo could mean that there were aspects of his past that would be damaging if they were known. I have no idea whether we have valid concerns and neither do you.
You have shoved this Obama omission aside with no concern–Why?
I provided jobs in my career for a lot of people>( really a lot) most of them were interviewed and vetted by my staff. Any important executive position required a transcript of college courses and grades and a CV of his or her entire work experience with recommendations from previous employers. I reviewed these applications for important positions personally.
It seems that such information concerning our recently employed President should be no less available to the public which has entrusted him with governing the nation.
Note that your race baiting is posted without exception. The absurdity of your allegations permits me to be generous in allowing your bigoted statements to appear on my blog.
The birther nonsense is, indeed, nonsense. With all the anti-Obama sentiment in the rightwingnut community, do you seriously argue that it is impossible to find ONE judge who would be willing to hold Obama’s feet to the legal fire, if there was ANY SHRED of evidence that would allow it to happen? (Yeah, you previously wrote about one judge whom you claim is holding a hearing of some sort in a couple of weeks, but I haven’t been able to find any mention of it from any legitimate news source. And I refuse to accept World Nut Daily as credible, becuase it’s repeatedly shown that it is anything but.)
If enough others agreed with you that seeing Obama’s college transcript is all that pertinent, it would have happened OR he wouldn’t have gotten 70 million votes to be elected President. Sad to say, Uncle Buck, but you don’t get to control the ground rules for the presidential vetting process. The whole of the American people do… and it didn’t seem to bother all those folks who didn’t have grave reservations about a black man being President.
And as for the inherent racism in much of the criticism of Obama, good old boy Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri just provided an excellent example at the so-called Values Voters Conference this weekend. Nothing like loosening up your crowd by telling a nice racist joke directed at the President of the United States:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul_TpDvxUJM
The “punch line”? “The rule was you have to play the ball where the monkey threw it. And that’s now the rule in Washington…..”
Sickening.
diogenes,
If you are correctly quoting Blount you and I are not far apart in our opinion of such a comment> My age and experience in various areas allows me to disapprove without actually getting sick. My level of sickening and hating requires more than your requirements. I believe Blount’s and other such comments are an embarrassment to most Americans.
Judge David O. Carter is the judge you can’t find. He is a United States District Court judge in California. I believe he was appointed by President Clinton. I googled the judge and the subject. Itcame up with dozens of references to the Scheduling Hearing on Oct 5 and the tentative trial date early next year. Look for yourself. and please comment on the Judges actions without using another Alinsky avoidance tactic.
Took awhile to find something that didn’t simply present the Orly Taitz/birther viewpoint of what’s going on here, and discussed what the judge had actually ordered in court. But I found it.
(And, here’s a helpful legal hint: if Orly Taitz is involved as plantiff’s counsel, expect that the defendant will win, 99 times out of 100.)
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/09/barnett-v-obama-september-8/
The hearing scheduled for October 5 is a hearing on the DOJ’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Yes, technically, there is a (very very) tentative trial date for January. That might be seen as a good sign for the plaintiffs, but it’s really not, in all likelihood. You see, Taitz is such a horrible lawyer (as a lawyer, she’s one hell of a dentist and/or real estate broker) it took her MONTHS to even effect legal service on the defendant. So Judge Carter is putting her on a strict timeline, to move this case along, because she’s so inept. He’s talking about how important this case is to the Republic so that he can give Taitz just enough legal rope to hang herself.
What is very likely to happen at that Oct. 5 hearing is that Taitz’ lawsuit will be dismissed, just like every other single lawsuit she’s filed for the birther movement. Taitz, simply put, has no evidence at all. In fact, it sometimes seems like she doesn’t even understand what “evidence” is. Taitz, like most birthers, is great at guessing what may or may not be true, but she’s got nothing to back it up. This particular case involved the SECOND of two unrelated “Kenyan birth certificates” that Taitz has supposedly discovered. The first has already been declared to be a clumsy forgery, and it looks like this one will be, too.
As for the judge ordering discovery, no, not really. What he said is that discovery WOULD NOT and COULD NOT proceed while there was a motion to dismiss pending. Taitz, in an effort to not seem totally incompetent, spun this into saying that the judge would “have a hearing to order discovery” on Oct. 5. That’s not what the judge apparently said, but hey, since the birther movement has had NO legal victories of any kind, they spun this one into a small victory… even when it wasn’t. Taitz is trying to hide the fact that the Oct. 5 hearing is on a motion to dismiss that she’s likely to lose, again, so she’s calling it a hearing on discovery. It’s not, except in her lawyer/dentist/real estate broker fatasy world.
diogenes
Thanks for taking the time to research and comment. It is getting scary that I find myself “occasionally” agreeing with you.I also believe that here is a good chance that the Kenya Certificate is bogus.
The embargo on all of the President’s activities through his life is disturbing and an off hand dismissal of it’s importance is not really acceptable. In five minutes after clicking “About” on Buck Says you would know more about my background than we know about the President.
PS
I’m also pretty sure that you left the n out of fantasy purposefully.
“I’m also pretty sure that you left the n out of fantasy purposefully.”
I’d like to say “yes” but it’s really just that my fingers are too fant for the keys on my laptop.