.: bio

 

 .: our blogs

 

 .: links
 Jimmy Gillman

Published - Monday, April 21, 2008

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (35 comment(s))

There he goes again

.
Those of us who remember Ronald Reagan slicing and dicing Jimmy Carter during their presidential debates will recall one of Reagan’s most disarming quips, “there he goes again,” which he would announce as a premise before responding to something outrageous or inaccurate Carter had said.

It was an extremely effective tactic, one that made the incumbent Carter look weak and superfluous. It’s a line one could use to describe Carter’s recent meeting with a terrorist Hamas leader, although Republican Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) put it best:

“Former President Carter has acted in contradiction of international agreements to isolate Hamas. He has acted in defiance of both United States policy and international policy. His actions reward terrorists, lend support, and provide legitimacy to their belief that violence will eventually get them what they want.”

As usual, Carter ignored America and its allies in favor of his self-important grandstanding, proving once again he is a man of uncontrollable ego and decidedly anti-Israel bias. But like most presidents, past and present, he obviously feels the rules apply only to others.

Click here for more.

MORE ON THE ABC DEBATE

I was encouraged to see so many in the media and elsewhere complain about the lousy and unprofessional conduct of ABC’s Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos in Wednesday final Democratic debate. Many viewers expected they would have to endure the low blows from Clinton, which for her is standard operating procedure. But Gibson and Stephanopoulos were downright ugly, and the network’s production of the debate crude and sophomoric.

Click here for more.

Click here for The Columbia Journalism Review’s take on the debate.
.
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

Richard Cranium wrote on Apr 25, 2008 4:10 PM:

" Hey Hobo: You should come into the new century. Your living a few decades behind the times. Carter has done more to advance the causes of peace than any politician in modern times. You just hate peace don't you? Carter followed two of the most despicable Presidents in the history of our country. Reagan was lucky to come along when he did. And what did he do? He started us on this long road of deficit spending. Ask them how "easy" that rescue mission was that you brought up. By the way, how many of the hostages died? It was because of Carter that they survived not in spite of. If Reagan or Bush would have been President at the time all the hostages would probably be dead. No JH, the failures of our current president far outnumber Carter's. (and Dubya followed a good president and a balanced budget). "

Johnny Hobo wrote on Apr 25, 2008 11:39 AM:

" Carter's recent failure with the Hamas folks brings up memories of his failures as President. I am reminded of how in January 1979 he met with Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping and secured assurances that China would do nothing aggressive against Vietnam. In February, the Red Army invaded Vietnam to, "Teach them a lesson." Who could forget in Spring/Summer of 1980 how the Islamic militants made Carter dance like a marionette as he tried to appease them and secure release of the Iranian hostages. Then,as Tess points out, when he tried to plan a "rescue" (Operation Eagle Claw,) his gutting of the military (to appease the Soviets) left us with Army incapable of pulling off even the simplest of exercises. At least Carter gave us Reagan, who restored American hope, rebuilt the military, established the 160th S.O.A.R., a helicopter aviation special forces group and single-handedly won the Cold War! "

Dear Tess wrote on Apr 23, 2008 3:08 PM:

" I didn't know Jimmy Carter was piloting the helicopter[s] that crahed trying to rescue the hostages. You should write a book with this insight. As far as I or anyone with a few braincells synapsing know the miltary failure in the dessert was entirely the MILITARY'S FAULT. Hey....let's put the blame where it is due....the military, given the gameplan, FAILED. Not Carter. It's called 'reality' sweetheart. "

Bugs to Tess wrote on Apr 23, 2008 8:44 AM:

" I can see it now. One of our Blackhawks landing in an apple pie. Go Obama! "

Tess Trueheart wrote on Apr 23, 2008 6:24 AM:

" As usual, Jimmy Carter accomplishes nothing! As Gordon Gekko stated, "A fool and his money are lucky to get together in the first place." Yet once again Carter walks away from the table with nothing but meaningless IOUs signed by Daffy Duck. What do you say about a guy who couldn't even get a helicopter to land in a dessert? "

Michael Welch: Carter "Update"... wrote on Apr 21, 2008 11:39 AM:

" In Damascus over the weekend Carter apparently got some of the Hamas leadership to say they would not undermine any Palestinian 'deal' with Israel that recognized Israel's 'right to exist' -- then SOMEONE Carter never heard of issued a statement that that didn't mean Hamas wouldn't oppose a referendum that included such recognition. But Carter also (in an interview on NPR today) stated that the Olmert government carries on regular 'talks' with Hamas through the Egyptians which I think is surely true for the Israelis are of necessity very practical and pragmatic. So: Carter may or may not have accomplished much; however he 'damaged' nothing as he did nothing the Israeli government itself doesn't do... "

Bugsy to Hobo wrote on Apr 21, 2008 11:02 AM:

" Johnny, did you lust in your heart? Also, if you have children, will there be a Hobo III? "

King Mabel wrote on Apr 21, 2008 9:14 AM:

" Why wouldn't Barak Hussein Obama talk to Chris Wallace? Wasn't there a blog concerning Chris Wallace several weeks ago where he defended Barak Hussein Obama from criticism from his co-workers? In fact, if you look at the first post of that blog, you begin to get a picture of what kind of a man Barak Hussein Obama is. His support of infanticide notwithstanding, it strikes me as a personal failure and cowardly that he is not willing to subject himself to an interview that may be somewhat "uncomfortable." How could anyone say Wallace would be anything but fair, given his(Wallace') defense of him? If anything, Wallace would be biased in favor of Barak Hussein Obama. "

harsch wrote on Apr 21, 2008 8:56 AM:

" Who is the radical muslim terrorist leader with nuclear weapons? "

to harsch and eddie wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:41 PM:

" if obama can't handle a TV news journalist then how in the world is he going to be able to handle a radical muslim terrorist leader with nuclear weapons? you guys (gals) are truely scary. (oh eddie, nice obamaish name calling. i suppose that's how obama will bring us all togather.....call those who he doesn't like, hacks.) "

Boom Boom Hussein Obama wrote on Apr 20, 2008 5:52 PM:

" I will not throw Ayers under the bus just because he is an remorseless terrorist. Would you? Can I get a big G*D D*MN AMERICA form everybody!!! Hallelujah!
"

Harsch wrote on Apr 20, 2008 4:14 PM:

" Who WOULDN'T rather talk with Ahmedinejad than Wallace? "

Eddie wrote on Apr 20, 2008 12:59 PM:

" 10:06am, there is a good reason why Obama will talk to Iranian President Ahmadinejad and not FOX NEWS' Chris Wallace. One is the President of Iran, and the other is an irrelevent TV media hack. A good President is willing to talk to ALL national leaders - especially the ones that may be unfriendly. You probably won't understand that, as you seem to see nothing but liberals and commies lurking everywhere. I feel sorry for you. "

another Obama oddity wrote on Apr 20, 2008 10:06 AM:

" He claims that he'll bring people togather, yet his association with people like Reverand Wright and Louis Farrakan and his statements like small town Midwesterners become gun grabbing, Bible totting racists when times get tough, actually divides people. Plus, Obama says he will talk with Iranian President Ahmadinejad, yet he refuses to talk to Fox New's Chris Wallace. It becomes obvious who is Obama's enemy and what Obama means when he says "unite", he means unite liberals, socialists, and communists with Marxists. "

BrianGSmith wrote on Apr 20, 2008 4:02 AM:

" I don't pay attention to things French that closely to care. Sarkhozy is quite a character and I wish him, his 20% approval rating, and the French well. Maybe you should move to Framce and live under EU "right wing" government leadership.....'cause the USA is making a sharp turn to the left and you might find yourself in a hissy-fitty mood....daily. "

BrianGSmith wrote on Apr 20, 2008 3:43 AM:

" Carter had to clean up the apocalyptic mess Nixon and Vietnam left the Nation. Carters draconian Fed banking steps were necessary, painful and set the stage for the good part of Reagan's economic success. He got Israel and Egypt to sign a Peace Accord that stands strong today....his current ventures into the hornets nest of the Middle East deomonstrates the immensity of his gravitas......fearless. Only neo-cons and parts of the Israeli gov't despise Carter. Israeli's....by a majority of 65% to 28%...favor DIRECT TALKS WITH HAMAS. So, in essence, Carter is doing for the Israeli's what the Israeli government won't do. "

McBush wrote on Apr 19, 2008 5:50 PM:

" Putting him in office would be a third term for the neocons. If you look at his voting record closely he was very much like Bush indeed. He was not for the Bush tax cuts at first but now he even wants to make them permanent. Everyone knows that won't happen because it's not possible. Carter followed two of the most despicable Presidents in our nations history. He couldn't be expected to turn things around in one term after following their mess. Reagan should be so lucky he came into office when he did. George W Bush is the Worst President Ever. "

Michael Welch: How McCain COULD Win... wrote on Apr 19, 2008 1:19 PM:

" By the way I think McCain would be a better president than W -- but then that's not so 'hard' is it? I do believe Big Mac MUST adapt to the declining economy and devise something more than Bushie tax cuts (which McC didn't like and voted against in the first place) as he's done lately re: the housing mortgage mess. He also MUST come up with something that implies at the least a 'time limit' on Iraq; without such his campaign will lose viability as indeed it would without some 'comprehensive' economic proposal that's, frankly, more liberal than conservative. McCain does NOT necessarily 'equal' Bush-Cheney (I don't he personally 'likes' either one) but Big Jawn has to EMPHASIZE that he isn't 'they'... "

Michael Welch: How Carter Was "Neutered"... wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:30 AM:

" Carter wanted his presidency to be a new beginning of sorts, a real 'dawn' and end to 'our long national nightmare' of Vietnam and Watergate and all those implied and entailed -- mainly the crushing of liberal optimism that 'began' for many with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Carter even announced his appointment of JFK 'alter ego'-adviser-speechwriter Theodore Sorenson, who had been a conscientious objector during WWII, as director of the CIA. Given the there are secrets and then there are 'SECRETS' in that notorious 'extra government' Sorenson could NOT be 'permitted' inside, much less 'command,' this inner sanctum sanctorum. Carter backed down under pressure and so even before inauguration day 1977 I believe the 'promise' of his presidency was essentially eviscerated... "

Michael Welch: Best EX-President Of The United States... wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:19 AM:

" I was disappointed in the Carter presidency but then JC's attitude had been that 'the pros' (i. e. LBJ, Nixon, Ford) had botched policies for a decade and more so who was to say that JC couldn't do better? His 'Camp David accord' between Israel and Egypt was a real achievement and a good start that unfortunately went no further. But then neither the Israelis nor the Egyptians (or Saudis behind the Cairo curtain) wanted any such Palestinian 'adjunct.' You gotta talk to 'the enemy' -- OR fight him; those ARE your only choices. Carter won't solve the essential problem -- Israel wants/has a palsied 'Palestine' it can regularly push around -- but why knock him for at least listening?... "

Yo wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:17 AM:

" Jimmy has taken money from organizations that support the Palestenian Authority. So he's just going to visit with his true friends. Just like the Ford Foundation that supports everything that is against Israel, carter does the same. He should be jailed upon return for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. Are there ANY Kennedy democrats left, ie: pay any price, bear any burden, support any friend, oppose any foe, to ensure the survival and success of liberty. "

BrianGSmith wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:26 AM:

" I actually wanted Berlusconi to win.....he's not perfect but he's a successful business man, loves Italy and is probably the best man to get italy our of it's melancholical swoon. The "left" in Italy sucks just as the "right" in the US suck.....both rotten with incestuous cronyism and incompetence. "

Brian has had a bad couple of months wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:57 AM:

" when you realize that France also had elections and the French chose the conservative over the socialist liberal. Brian is running out of countries that support his socialist, liberal world view. If McCain wins, Brian's head will probably explode. Go McCain! "

Carter was as bad as he seemed wrote on Apr 19, 2008 5:05 AM:

" He won an election against the first nonelected "sitting" president we ever had. Ford had been chosen to replace Agnew (who got caught with cash in paper bags) because Nixon figured there was no way he would get impeached and removed from office if Ford were the alternative.
Jimmy won because Ford went on to pardon Nixon and because Ford claimed Poland was part of the Eastern Europe Communist Bloc. Ford's way of handling run-away inflation was to encourage people to wear "whip Inflation Now" Buttons.
When Jimmy had to actually face-off against somebody that "wasn't Gerry Ford", he lost.
His presidency was a complete and utter failure. "

Eddie wrote on Apr 18, 2008 8:03 PM:

" Jimmy Gillman, you're dead wrong about Mr. Carter. He has a higher calling than the rest of us, that being building world peace. All of our petty political bickering and hypocrisies should be ignored by great diplomats like Jimmy Carter. Those of us who truly desire peace should NEVER give up on diplomacy and being willing to listen to hostile countries. Our current adminstration does does desire peace. It desires domination of the Middle East - both economically and politically. For that, they should be condemned. "

Brian Smith is upset because wrote on Apr 18, 2008 5:33 PM:

" in Italy Berlusconi defeated Walter Veltroni's "Democratic Party". The big news is that the Communists are gone, for the first time since the end of the Second World War. Really gone. They didn't win a single seat in either chamber. A lot of famous faces will vanish from Parliament, and it is even possible, although unlikely, that some of the comrades will be forced to join the working class. The Greens are also gone. In fact, there are only six parties in the new Parliament, suggesting that Italy's well on the road to a two-party political system instead of the dreadful proportional electoral model that has destroyed virtually every country where it's been applied. "

BrianGSmith wrote on Apr 18, 2008 4:01 PM:

" Harsch is spot on. Hamas, love 'em or hate 'em, won an election deemed fair. All we know about Hamas is what our pathetic corporate media scripts for us. No doubt alot of bad is happening....from both sides. So why not talk to Hamas. Bush's people spoke directly with the Sunni insurgents killing US soldiers and came to an agreement (we pay them million$ to be cool). Carter doesn't joke around and has been given blame and a bad rap for far too many things beyond his control. This guy Captained a Nuke Sub, made millions in agriculture and proposed the "Neutron bomb" as a new weapon of choice in the height of the Cold War Arms race. The Neutron Bomb kills the population with radiation, exploding a mile or so above the ground, leaving the infrastructure intact! Jimmy had a 'dark side'. "

Johnny Hobo to Bugsy wrote on Apr 18, 2008 3:17 PM:

" As an unabashed, unashamed heterosexual male, I appreciate the naked female form as much, if not more, than the next guy. But, alas, the aforementioned and cited Brando interview was from a compilation Playboy interview book that I received as a gift. If I remember correctly, the Brando interview was part of the 25th Anniversary edition published in early 1979. The beautiful Candy Loving (yes, that's her real name) was in the centre-spread. "

Bugs to Hobo wrote on Apr 18, 2008 2:11 PM:

" Hey, Johnny. I suppose you bought the "Playboy" for the articles, right? "

Harsch wrote on Apr 18, 2008 2:11 PM:

" Hamas won an election--ignoring them means ignoring a lot of people who have reason to be angry enough to vote for them. If you believe that Israelis and Arab Palestinians are innately of equal value, then it would be worth your while to try to understand how things have come to such a pass. The people who voted for Hamas are not an elite--they're the kind of people who in countries at peace generally vote to maintain the status quo. There is no reason at all to doubt old Carter's sincerity, nor is it surprising that some diplomats understand that Hamas can not be ignored. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Apr 18, 2008 12:38 PM:

" Jimmy Carter, of course, won the Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago. Now that gets to me to thinking. What honors and titles should be accorded Georgie Bush? Satan's Minion sounds about right. Or The Devil's Legion of Evil award. The Standard Oil War Prize. The Prince of Death, Darkness and Destruction. The Torture Terminator, Cheney's Puppet. Pretzel Pinhead...well, y'all can come up with your own. Jimmy will pick the winner, who will then receive an all expenses paid trip to Guantanamo. "

Johnny Hobo wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:54 AM:

" Hardly surprising. Years ago, Marlon Brando, in a Playboy interview, talked about certain celebrities being, "Applause junkies..." and that they would, "Show up for an opening of a phone booth as long as a camera and microphone was there." President Carter, so ashamed of his own failed presidency, continues to attempt to find a legacy. Some attempts, Habitat for Humanity, do limited good, while others, like his Hamas sojourn, are spurious at best. One certainly can't dismiss the prospect that Carter is being secretly manipulated by GW Bush to creating dialogue with *ahem, ahem* moderate elements of Hamas. "

Bad Bad Bama wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:29 AM:

" I just want to say that Boom Boom Ayers is one of the finest anti America terrorist I've seen and Rev. Wright has shown me the need for change. "

Re Jimmy Carter wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:01 AM:

" How is this different than Barak Hussein Obama cavorting with terrorists and calling a man such as Wright a friend? "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Apr 18, 2008 9:36 AM:

" I applaud Carter. He's trying to bring peace to the area. Israel is also guilty of terrorism. The bloodshed will continue as long as Israel continues to treat Palestinians as sub-human. "


The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of theRiver Valley Blogs.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »

We will not post reader comments containing racial, religious or personal attacks, slander, profanity, e-mail addresses, mailing addresses, phone numbers or Web site addresses that are for personal or promotional gain.
(optional)
   
Thank you for your comments! Once your comments are approved, they will appear on the site.

 

 

Copyright © RVNG Publications | RVNG is a division of Lee Enterprises