Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook Watch us on YouTube
Register
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    Unchained
    Join Date
    03.05.00
    Location
    Columbus, OH USA
    Posts
    517
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    okay, now that the ronnie thread has been totally derailed, time for more monkey fun!

    everyone bitches about "character counts" and how the president of the united states should be a man of integrity, etc. but they had that with carter, a pious man who served his country as a sailor and civilian. and everyone puts the hatchet in old jimmy's back. he was unseated by a twice-married snitch from hollywood, who was replaced by a former CIA head, who was replaced by the ever lovin' sex machine (still not an impeachable offense 'tho), who was replaced by a silver spoon drunk who claims jesus is his hero, although he seems to enjoy killing folk just fine. just something to remember, next time someone talks about "character," they might be full of shit.

  2. #2
    carpe damn diem billy007's Avatar
    Join Date
    04.19.00
    Age
    54
    Location
    On the wild card line...
    Posts
    28,682
    Favorite VH Song

    "Dance The Night Away"
    Last Online

    12.15.17 @ 05:35 PM
    Likes
    1,046
    Liked 1,350 Times in 926 Posts

    I admire Jimmy Carter very much for the work that he's done since 1981, but as a president he really did nothing for me - sure, I was only 13 the year he was elected, but still...

    I think he proved that nice guys don't necessarily make good politicians - he wanted to negotiate and be peaceful and all that, and what did it get us? Our people spent some 444 days I believe it was in some God-forsaken foreign country - they never should've been there that long. Nothing wrong with using our military when it's called for - they are the best in the business.

    But hey, without Jimmy Carter as president we never would've gotten to watch a single episode of "Carter Country" or drink a single ounce of "Billy Beer" (not that I did - remember, I was only 17 when he left office! What year did "J.R. Beer" come out?)

  3. #3
    Sinner's Swing! Aquatic Punk's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.16.00
    Age
    37
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,723
    Favorite VH Album

    Fair Warning
    Favorite VH Song

    Mean Streets
    Last Online

    01.11.12 @ 06:57 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    History has not been kind to Jimmy Carter's Presidency. He has gotten a bad rap, some of it deserved, some exaggeratted. But I would be happy to see more presidents modeling their post presidency after him.
    Gozer the Traveller will come in one of the pre-chosen forms. During the rectification of the Vuldronaii the Traveller came as a very large and moving Torb. Then of course in the third reconciliation of the last of the Meketrex supplicants they chose a new form for him, that of a Sloar. Many Shubs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Sloar that day I can tell you.
    -Lewis Tully in Ghostbusters

  4. #4
    Good Enough wip5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    06.05.02
    Age
    48
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,776
    Favorite VH Album

    Balance, WACF
    Favorite VH Song

    Humans Being, Romeo Delight,
    Last Online

    02.05.15 @ 12:19 PM
    Likes
    4
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Donor

    It's hard not to admire Jimmy Carter - whatever your politics may be. It's quite clear the man has is compassionate and truly wants to make the world a better place. I can think of several former President's that don't quite fit that bill.
    "There is a fine line between stupid and clever" - Nigel Tufnel

  5. #5
    Watch the hair!!!
    Join Date
    03.23.02
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    1,673
    Favorite VH Album

    VH/Fair Warning/5150/F.U.C.K.
    Favorite VH Song

    R.Delight/Unchain./5150/C.Wabo
    Last Online

    07.22.09 @ 11:11 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    I respect Jimmy Carter as a man. His morality and desire to want to do good for the American people is unquestioned. Unfortunately, he was not up to the job of President.

    Carter's foreign and economic policies were a disaster. IMO, he was the worst President since Herbert Hoover. That's why he lost the presidency in 1980 by the largest margin of any incumbent since Hoover. I also think his actions as a former President have been equally as bad, as over the years he's turned into an apologist and supporter of several anti-American despots, like North Korea's Kim Il Sung and Cuba's Fidel Castro. That may work to win you the Nobel Peace Prize, but it does so at the expense of the national security of America and its allies. When discussing the great Presidents of the past 60 years, you will hear the names Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan uttered, but you should NEVER hear the name Jimmy Carter mentioned in that context.
    "Seems the old folks who come up short were the pretty little kids who didn't want it, no." - Van Halen (1979)

    "Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising every time we fall." - Confucius

    "The possibility that we may fail in the struggle should not deter us from supporting a cause we believe to be just." - Abraham Lincoln

  6. #6
    Baluchitherium Guitar Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.08.01
    Age
    47
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,334
    Favorite VH Song

    Mean Street
    Last Online

    03.01.10 @ 10:22 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Donor

    Originally posted by Delighted Romeo:
    I also think his actions as a former President have been equally as bad, as over the years he's turned into an apologist and supporter of several anti-American despots, like North Korea's Kim Il Sung and Cuba's Fidel Castro.
    Come on, man... "apologist and supporter" of Kim Il Sung and Castro?! Don't you think that's stretching it? Carter may disagree with some aspects of U.S. foreign policy towards North Korea and Cuba, but I don't see how that makes him a supporter of those communist regimes.

    [ December 18, 2002, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Guitar Shark ]

  7. #7
    Watch the hair!!!
    Join Date
    03.23.02
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    1,673
    Favorite VH Album

    VH/Fair Warning/5150/F.U.C.K.
    Favorite VH Song

    R.Delight/Unchain./5150/C.Wabo
    Last Online

    07.22.09 @ 11:11 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Originally posted by Guitar Shark:
    Come on, man... "apologist and supporter" of Kim Il Sung and Castro?! Don't you think that's stretching it? Carter may disagree with some aspects of U.S. foreign policy towards North Korea and Cuba, but I don't see how that makes him a supporter of those communist regimes.

    If anything, he's supporting the concept of peace and trying
    Perhaps not "supporter" in the case of North Korea. But he has been a lot more supportive of the Cuban regime, as he's been talking about normalizing relations with them for years. Of course, he's never mentioned any concessions that Castro would have to make before relations could be normalized. Carter has certainly been at least an apologist for both North Korea and Cuba, citing U.S. actions as the reasons for their behavior. It's this type of flawed reasoning that causes him to believe that if you're just nice to despotic regimes, they will come around to your way of thinking. That doesn't happen too often.

    As for "supporting the concept of peace and trying," I don't disagree with that. But misplaced attempts don't do anyone any good, as we've found out when it came to the agreement Carter negotiated with North Korea back in 1994, which they've now flagrantly violated. Once again, Carter's good intentions and his "trying" don't mean anything now, do they?!?
    "Seems the old folks who come up short were the pretty little kids who didn't want it, no." - Van Halen (1979)

    "Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising every time we fall." - Confucius

    "The possibility that we may fail in the struggle should not deter us from supporting a cause we believe to be just." - Abraham Lincoln

  8. #8
    Baluchitherium Guitar Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    11.08.01
    Age
    47
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,334
    Favorite VH Song

    Mean Street
    Last Online

    03.01.10 @ 10:22 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Donor

    Originally posted by Delighted Romeo:
    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Guitar Shark:
    Come on, man... "apologist and supporter" of Kim Il Sung and Castro?! Don't you think that's stretching it? Carter may disagree with some aspects of U.S. foreign policy towards North Korea and Cuba, but I don't see how that makes him a supporter of those communist regimes.

    If anything, he's supporting the concept of peace and trying
    Perhaps not "supporter" in the case of North Korea. But he has been a lot more supportive of the Cuban regime, as he's been talking about normalizing relations with them for years. Of course, he's never mentioned any concessions that Castro would have to make before relations could be normalized. Carter has certainly been at least an apologist for both North Korea and Cuba, citing U.S. actions as the reasons for their behavior. It's this type of flawed reasoning that causes him to believe that if you're just nice to despotic regimes, they will come around to your way of thinking. That doesn't happen too often.

    As for "supporting the concept of peace and trying," I don't disagree with that. But misplaced attempts don't do anyone any good, as we've found out when it came to the agreement Carter negotiated with North Korea back in 1994, which they've now flagrantly violated. Once again, Carter's good intentions and his "trying" don't mean anything now, do they?!?
    </font>[/QUOTE]That unfinished sentence was a mistake that I later edited out. My point was simply that I think Carter is trying to promote peace, as opposed to supporting those regimes. I know you agree with the first part but disagree with the second; and we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. [img]smile.gif[/img]

  9. #9
    Unchained
    Join Date
    03.05.00
    Location
    Columbus, OH USA
    Posts
    517
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    oh goody, the old republican blame game. how much is carter to blame for north korea? what happened to the ditto head posts that claimed only saddam was responsible for saddam, no matter what reagan and george I did? hypocrites.

    might li'l bush also have a hand in this? let's look at his policy of refusing to continue any foreign policy peace initiatives from clinton:

    ireland - increased violence

    isreal - increased violence

    north korea - nuclear reactor

    it's probably clinton's fault for not bush-proofing things. he should have known president DWI would be in over his head.

  10. #10
    Watch the hair!!!
    Join Date
    03.23.02
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    1,673
    Favorite VH Album

    VH/Fair Warning/5150/F.U.C.K.
    Favorite VH Song

    R.Delight/Unchain./5150/C.Wabo
    Last Online

    07.22.09 @ 11:11 AM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Originally posted by Ikeda:
    oh goody, the old republican blame game.
    Of course, Democrats never affix blame to the Republicans for anything, right?!? Both sides play this game, so don’t insult my intelligence with this Paul Begala-inspired vernacular.

    Originally posted by Ikeda:
    how much is carter to blame for north korea? what happened to the ditto head posts that claimed only saddam was responsible for saddam, no matter what reagan and george I did? hypocrites.
    Since you are a writer, I have to assume you have some reading comprehension skills, too. Read what I posted again, Writer Boy. Where did I blame Carter for the actions of North Korea?!? The current government of Kim Jong-Il is to blame for this latest violation by North Korea (and it IS the government of Saddam Hussein that is to blame for Iraq’s violations). I blamed Carter for how he –- and the Clinton Administration –- dealt with North Korea in 1994, as he actually trusted a despotic regime to honor an agreement, which they never do (if Neville Chamberlain were alive, he’d likely agree with me). Next time, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you can properly read my post without drawing incorrect interpretations of what I wrote.

    Originally posted by Ikeda:
    might li'l bush also have a hand in this? let's look at his policy of refusing to continue any foreign policy peace initiatives from clinton:

    ireland - increased violence

    isreal - increased violence

    north korea - nuclear reactor

    it's probably clinton's fault for not bush-proofing things. he should have known president DWI would be in over his head.
    No, it’s Clinton’s fault for setting up a house of cards that was likely to fall over. Plus, apparently you forgot about the impact 9-11 had on the Bush Administration’s foreign policy plans. You also act like these situations that you mentioned were all settled when Bush took office. The thing I can't understand about Left-wingers on this board is how they rationalize blasting the U.S. for its involvement in foreign lands over the years, while criticizing the Bush Administration for not getting involved enough in foreign situations like the ones you mentioned. I don't want to put words in your mouth so let me ask: Is that YOUR position, Ikeda?!?

    Ireland, one area where Clinton did an admirable job IMO, had flare ups during the latter years of Clinton’s second term. Perhaps the Bush Administration could’ve spent more time to this point on the situation in Ireland, but since 9-11, which was only 7-1/2 months after he took office, the focus obviously had to be switched to other foreign hot-spots more vital to U.S. national security interests.

    Regarding the Israel/Palestinian situation, let’s take a look at recent history. In September 2000, after Clinton’s failed attempts at brokering a deal between Israel and the Palestinians to establish a state of Palestine, Arafat/PLO declared the beginning of the second Palestinian intifada, which prompted renewed violence between the two parties. This was before the 2000 election even took place, so it wasn’t like Clinton was handing off a stable situation to Bush. Nonetheless, for you to even imply that Bush –- or any other President -– truly has a way of brokering peace over there isn’t grounded in reality. I, too, thought that Clinton had a slight chance in 2000 of closing the deal, but subsequent actions by Arafat pretty much convinced me that there will NEVER be an agreement between the two parties. The Israel people see that, too, which is why they replaced a soft-liner like Ehud Barak as Prime Minister with a hard-liner like Ariel Sharon in early 2001.

    As for North Korea, puh-lease. Do you actually think that they hadn’t already secretly violated the agreement with the U.S. by developing their nuclear weapon capabilities during the Clinton years?!?

    No matter what you think of George W. Bush, his administration’s foreign policy team is one of the most experienced in the history of our nation. You may not agree with their approach to world affairs but to imply that he or his administration are “in over their heads” is patently absurd and is only partisan-speak on your part.
    "Seems the old folks who come up short were the pretty little kids who didn't want it, no." - Van Halen (1979)

    "Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising every time we fall." - Confucius

    "The possibility that we may fail in the struggle should not deter us from supporting a cause we believe to be just." - Abraham Lincoln

  11. #11
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    Originally posted by Delighted Romeo:
    As for North Korea, puh-lease. Do you actually think that they hadn't already secretly violated the agreement with the U.S. by developing their nuclear weapon capabilities during the Clinton years?!?
    Of course they had, and Clinton knew they would. Foreign policy is a more subtle tool than you realize. The idea wasn't to stop their nuclear program--that was the ideal. What we settled for was hampering and slowing it, with the intention of developing our own counter-weapons and strategies to negate the power of a nuclear North Korea. North Korea with a small number of weapons in 2006 is much more managable than North Korea with a small number of weapons in 1996.

  12. #12
    Damage your reputation seenbad's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.24.00
    Age
    45
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    26,946
    Favorite VH Album

    Halen 1
    Favorite VH Song

    I'm the one
    Last Online

    12.15.17 @ 10:48 AM
    Likes
    73
    Liked 257 Times in 92 Posts


    Donor

    You really think Clinton held that much forsight?
    sheepa latta peepah dabba looka foh a moopy

    Gunter glieben glauchen globen

  13. #13
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    Originally posted by seenbad:
    You really think Clinton held that much forsight?
    Yeah, I do. The Airborne Laser project was begun in 1993, and projected to be operational sometime around 2006. The Army's theater defense system (THAAD) was begun in 1992, and could also come online around 2006. I don't recall when the Navy's program began (NTW), but it slipped a bit to sometime around 2008. They're supposed to have a low-altitude component deployed next year.

    This all evolved from SDI, and the Scud attacks during the Gulf War. Bush's administration reorganized SDI to have theater-level weapons, and Clinton's administration started pouring money into it in the mid-90s. They also kept the NMD program going, which Bush has pushed to a 2004 deployment.

    People don't give Clinton's administration much credit when it comes to military issues, but they laid the groundwork for many of the systems we'll be using during this decade. Ford and Carter were responsible for our ability to vastly improve our military during the 80s.

  14. #14
    Damage your reputation seenbad's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.24.00
    Age
    45
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    26,946
    Favorite VH Album

    Halen 1
    Favorite VH Song

    I'm the one
    Last Online

    12.15.17 @ 10:48 AM
    Likes
    73
    Liked 257 Times in 92 Posts


    Donor

    Sounds like you have done your homework. Slick willy actually did something right! [img]graemlins/bounce.gif[/img]
    sheepa latta peepah dabba looka foh a moopy

    Gunter glieben glauchen globen

  15. #15
    Unchained
    Join Date
    03.05.00
    Location
    Columbus, OH USA
    Posts
    517
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Originally posted by Delighted Romeo:
    I also think his actions as a former President have been equally as bad, as over the years he's turned into an apologist and supporter of several anti-American despots, like North Korea's Kim Il Sung and Cuba's Fidel Castro.
    when you said that carter was a "supporter" of despots, i took that to mean you feel he has aided and abetted these men. it seemed clear to me, but if i misunderstood your use of "supporter," then i take back whatever words i put in your mouth. otherwise we can call reagan and bush "supporters" of hussein and the ayatollah, of noreiga and milosovic.

    when i refer to a blame game, i mean the maddening tendancy i've noticed where some republicans argue "my party, right or wrong." i will blame republicans, and i will blame democrats. i have made reference to a number of my disagreements with clinton, daschle (wuss), and the democratic party. neither party is right a 100 percent of the time, although my personal opinion is that the democrats are truer to the Constitution. while you are excellent at blaming the left, and trying to defend your president, i rarely see your arguements rise above the level of propaganda. i think strungout has made the same mistake from the left, and both you guys have isolated a lot of readers and gotten into pissing matches with others. i know already you don't care about that; still, it's a drag on the discussion.

    [ December 19, 2002, 12:02 AM: Message edited by: Ikeda ]

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. The day when they died!
    By boatontheriver70 in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01.04.06, 04:32 PM
  2. Nick Carter...Pearl Jam Cover????????
    By swage in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Music Only)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01.26.03, 02:21 PM
  3. chris carter to sign with dolphins
    By JMJ in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10.19.02, 04:50 PM
  4. John Carter of Mars THE MOVIE?
    By FanHalen in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04.12.02, 07:46 AM
  5. Anyone catch Valerie's "Night Sins"?
    By Red-Balled Mammoth in forum Main VH Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07.24.00, 05:23 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •