Jimmy Carter

 Former President Jimmy Carter once again embarrassed himself, and frankly, the nation last week. Stretching way into the deck to play the race card over Congressman Joe Wilson’s “You lie” remark, Carter said, "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American." And this pearl of wisdom as he continued, "I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a long way, and I've seen the rest of the country that shares the South's attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African-Americans.""I think it's based on racism," Carter said at a town hall held at his presidential center in Atlanta. "There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."

Well Mr. Carter, I live in the south, too, and I say you are just a clueless old man who should go back to peanut farming since you apparently have nothing intelligent to say. There is an “inherent feeling” among anybody with an IQ in triple digits that you should just shut up. I apologize to the Office of the Presidency for that language, but I just can’t muster any respect for a lying race baiter. There is absolutley no evidence that Wilson’s comment had anything whatsoever to do with race. Nor is the national opposition to Obama’s heath care proposals based on race. It’s based on a belief that nationalization of health care is a bad idea. I was against it when Hillary tried it in the early nineties, too. Was I racist then? Mr. Carter continues to proudly display his incompetence and irrelevance for all to see.I get so sick of this disengenuous garbage from people like Carter when they imply that conservatives in general and Republicans specifically are racist. Maybe it’s time for a little history lesson for the former president. 

In 1964, it took the leadership of Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen to break the Democratic filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. That filibuster was led by current Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, and then Democrat Senator Al Gore Sr. of Tennessee. In the Senate, only six Republicans voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, compared to twenty-one Democrats in opposition. In the House, 40% of the Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act, while only 20% of Republicans opposed it. And yes, that would be the same Democrat Senator Byrd who was a proud former member of the KKK.

Were Republicans racist when they named the first two black Secretaries of State, Powell and then Rice, to office? Were they racist when they put the first black Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas, in place? Would it be fair to say the Democrats were racist when they publicly and unjustifiably vilified Justice Thomas and his family? I make no such claim, but I have no doubt it would have been claimed by the Democrats had the roles been reversed. Does the average liberal genius Democrat out there even know that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican?

Was Democrat former President Clinton racist when he said that William Fulbright was a visionary and was a hero to him? Fulbright was a vehement segregationalist and was one of the Democrats opposed to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.Carter’s own abysmal record on things racial brings into question his standing to criticize anyone regarding such issues. When Carter returned to Georgia after his Navy tour, he became a member of the Sumter County School Board. As documented in the National review Online (Sep. 18, 2009) “Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU’s Voting Project, relates in his book A Voting Rights Odyssey: Black Enfranchisement in Georgia, Carter’s board tried to stop the construction of a new “Elementary Negro School” in 1956. Local white citizens had complained that the school would be “too close” to a white school. As a result, “the children, both colored and white, would have to travel the same streets and roads in order to reach their respective schools.” The prospect of black and white children commingling on the streets on their way to school was apparently so horrible to Carter that he requested that the state school board stop construction of the black school until a new site could be found. The state board turned down Carter’s request because of “the staggering cost.” Carter and the rest of the Sumter County School Board then reassured parents at a meeting on October 5, 1956, that the board “would do everything in its power to minimize simultaneous traffic between white and colored students in route to and from school.”

And this from noted Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz in Frontpage Magazine, April 27, 2007, “If he who pays the piper calls the tune, then Carter's off-key tunes have been called by his Saudi Arabian paymasters. It pains me to say this, but I now believe that there is no person in American public life today who has a lower ratio of real to apparent integrity than Jimmy Carter. The public perception of his integrity is extraordinarily high. His real integrity, it now turns out, is extraordinarily low. He is no better than so many former American politicians who, after leaving public life, sell themselves to the highest bidder and become lobbyists for despicable causes. That is now Jimmy Carter's sad legacy.”

Carter had a cozy, personal relationship with former Palestinian dictator Yassir Arafat. In fact, he seems to have some affinity for thug dictators around the world, chumming with the likes of Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, former Yugoslav strongman Marshal Josef Tito, former Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaucescu, former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos, former Pakistani General Zia ul-Haq, former North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung and now his son Kim Jong Il, among others. His anti-Israel positions are well documented, including in his own book, "Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid." As an author, Mr. Carter has the dubious distinction of having his book an the must read list of none other than Osama bin Laden.

Jimmy Carter is widely accepted as the worst U.S. President ever. His attempts at Middle East peace were jokes to everyone except him and the Nobel prize committee. His term was a disaster, and he went downhill from there. He has no credibility to be critical of anyone regarding race relations, or frankly, anything else. Just retire already.

read more at http://commonconservativesense.com 

On the main page, Jon Henke offers a template for Republican mea culpa that should allow us to move forward.  I agree with the assessment that we owe the American people an explanation of where we went wrong AND (let's not forget) where we went right over the past eight years.  That said, such a mea culpa has to concentrate on the issues where we actually WENT WRONG as opposed to the one major issue where George W. Bush sacrificed his personal popularity to lead the United States (and the entire world) to a better tomorrow.

On that note, these are the seven legitmate issues for a Republican Mea Culpa:

1) Terri Schivao

2) Harriet Miers

3) TARP and Bailout Nation.

4) 2002 and 2008 Farm Bills

5) Duke Cunningham, et. al.

6) 2005 Highway Bill

7) Continuing and expanding Carter/Clinton "affordable housing" policies.

Things that have NO PLACE on this list: IRAQ, Medicare Part D, Katrina, Missle Defense, or ANYTHING related to the War on Terror.

Agnostic: No Child Left Behind, Immigration.

Thoughts/Suggestions?!?

President-elect Barack Obama has laid out a plan to “create or save” three million jobs during his first two years in office. His plan is to increase government spending, deficit be damned, by at least $775 billion dollars over that same period. While the projects he plans to invest in are things that we Americans can all use, the stimulus plan will be a flop. Here’s how I got here:

Let’s start with the money. Obama plans to increase government spending without any increases in taxes, so that negates his use of PAYGO budgeting. At the same time, the total amount of money per job that he creates or saves will come out to more than $258,333 per job. There are business executives who don’t even make this money for their job, yet Obama, who has never held a private sector job in his lifetime figures the cost of a job to “create or save” at more than one quarter of a million dollars.

Any reasonable businessperson, like myself, will tell you that if it cost that much money to save a job, we would rather sooner terminate the job immediately. The problem here is that Obama and the other people in government have no real concept of what it costs to run a business, generally speaking. The purpose of a business is not to make customers happy or to employ as many people as possible. The end goal of a business is maximizing their profits and making their shareholders money. Those who do not live by that mantra of making money for the company and stockholders quickly go out of business.

The two things that the average person on the street does not realize are how much one billion is and how much one trillion is.  For the concept of one billion dollars, imagine that on the day of the birth of Jesus Christ you were given one billion dollars and had to spend $1,000 each day onward while gaining no interest, you would be still be spending money for at least the next 700 years.  By comparison, one trillion dollars is one thousand times one billion.

Second, according to the CIA Factbook, the current Gross Domestic Product (GDP, or the total value of all goods and services produced inside the borders of the United States) currently sits at $14.334 trillion. In other words the stimulus is only 5.4 percent of GDP. From here, that percentage goes down fast.

In the Highway Spending Bill that Congress recently passed, less than 26 percent of that money was spent within the first fiscal year. If this holds true, it then means that a value of less than one-and-a-half percent of the nation’s GDP will be infused in to the economy within the first fiscal year of the stimulus bill’s existence. For an economy that will be going in to a deep recession throughout 2009, this does not bode well for Obama.

The end result is an increase in inflation thanks to the increase of the deficit to a level that will approach or exceed two trillion dollars this fiscal year and a slow-to-respond stimulus bill that will actually, when implemented, cause the death of many jobs.

However, that is only half the story about Obama’s economic plans for America. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to get Obama to sign the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) which is Orwellian by name, but will cause considerable damage when implemented and enforced. Barring a miraculous filibuster by the Republicans in the Senate, America’s workforce will become unionized and small businesses will close their doors.

What’s more is that the unions will get the ultimate payback from the Democrats they helped get elected. Their membership and union dues received will increase which will give the unions considerable influence in American politics and with their membership. Also, the union bosses will be able to oversee how each of its members votes in a union election, bringing to an end the secret ballot. If the Senate Republicans cannot stop this bill, small businesses in the United States will either have to shell out more of their money to meet the demands of the unions or they will close their doors, or both.

If this comes in to play, the projections for an unemployment rate of nine percent will look good to Americans because the unemployment rate in the USA will be higher than at any time since Ronald Reagan’s first term following the horrific economic policies of Jimmy Carter. The only difference is that Reagan was able to lower the unemployment rate from its peak in December 1982 of 10.8 percent to 8.3 percent in December 1983 and ultimately to 7.2 percent the very month he won a 49-state landslide win against Walter Mondale. By contrast, Obama won his election with an inflation rate of 1.07 percent and an unemployment rate of 6.7 percent in November 2008.

Finally, research from economists at UCLA determined that the Great Depression lasted seven years longer because of the New Deal. Obama wants to implement the New New Deal almost from the moment he takes office. Considering that the double-digit unemployment rates did not end until 1943, this means that had the New Deal not been implemented by President Franklin Roosevelt, the Great Depression would have ended in 1936 leading to an easy reelection.

The reality is that Obama doesn’t have the luxuries that FDR had when he was President, yet he wants to take us back to the past with an economic policy that exacerbated and extended this long economic slump. If this plan flops (and it will), just like FDR, Obama will come back with a sequel of New New Deal II which will be used as a means to “save” his job during a time of economic distress.

If the Republicans are able to do anything, it will be to vote against the stimulus package and to attempt to block the EFCA. Should this happen, they will have the ability to say that these things are prolonging the economic crisis and that they fought it all the way. If not, they will be on the same side of the line as Obama and the Democrats in 2010 and again in 2012 which could pave the way for two terms of economic agony.

It’s almost crunch time and the Republicans need to fight the expansion of big government early and often, then turn around and use it as a means to defeat Obama and Obamaism when given the opportunities to do so in 2010 and 2012. If not, they will become a permanent minority party with previous successful Presidents like Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan as distant memories of what was once great about America, but never will be again.

It’s time for the GOP to be ready to fight Barack Obama when he’s wrong (like on these matters) and Obamaism. 

Ok, I think I am beginning to understand democrat logic which actually scares me. No, I haven't bought in - Chas v'Shalom, but I am seeing a picture now which I will try to illustrate.

The modern liberal/democrat must be able to ignore truth for vision. Vision of course, without truth is fantasy. But that doesn't stop the left. When fantastical beliefs in new ideas emerge, ideas which are based upon fantasy more so than observation, on idealism more so than realism, on a slavish connection to a misnomer casting away thoughtful analysis, then you have liberal thought.

Basing policy on this reasoning is the core mandate of liberal democrats. Even when it is pitifully obvious that the results of this process is destructive, the process is held in such esteem that the results cannot be criticized. Jimmy Carter's priorities in foreign policy come from that system. It permits antiJewism so long as his far-fetched policy derived from the fantasy led process of analysis is intact.

Carter will be speaking at the Democrat National Convention next week in Denver. Even though there are still some level headed Democrats around who understand that the Carter chain around the neck of Obama is a poltergeist of Joseph Goebbels which Obama will have to wear through November, they are powerless to prevent a talk by the former President who is the standard setter for liberal thought today. The process must have its day after all.

What message is Obama trying to send? Clearly he or his team have approved or cancelled speakers at the convention. So Obama must approve of Carter the antiJew speaking at his convention. Democrats have a problem because they have fostered and accepted this sort of non-sense thought inside their tent. Obama is stuck with it whether he likes it or not. My guess is he does like it. It strengthens him and gives credence to his appeasement manner.

The dems are trying to stem the tide of the dissolving Jewish vote, putting "rabbis" on the agenda and continually trying to bolster Obama's Jewish credentials. But sending out Carter the fantastical antiJew to the podium will by necessity remind everyone of Carter's Jew baiting. This is not the best America can do.

Expect McCain to pick up additional Jewish support as a result of the dems convention and it's media coverage. The alternative media should have a field day with this one. Kudos to the Young Israel for their courage and leadership.
________________________________________________________

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/151814 
Young Israel Calls on Democrats to Cancel Carter Speech - INN
(IsraelNN.com) The National Council of Young Israel has called on Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama and party leaders to cancel next week's scheduled address by former American President Jimmy Carter at the party convention in Denver, Colorado. Carter's public statements and his recent visit to Syria have attracted widespread criticism among pro-Israel supporters.

Young Israel president Shlomo Z. Mostofsky and executive vice president Rabbi Pesach Lerner stated, "Affording Mr. Carter a prime speaking engagement on the Democrats' brightest stage is an affront to the State of Israel, and to all American Zionists, whether they are Christians or Jews.

"In April, 2008 he deliberately and wantonly ignored the wishes of the United States government when he traveled to Syria to meet with Khaled Mashaal, the head of Hamas' terrorist organization. The fact that he embraced Hamas, a terrorist group that has repeatedly called for the destruction of the State of Israel, the obliteration of the United States, and the annihilation of the Jewish people, was a slap in the face to Israel, the U.S., and Jews everywhere."
______________________________________________________________________
 A Handy List of Carter is an AntiJew Articles

http://www.zoa.org/sitedocuments/pressrelease_view.asp?pressreleaseID=645   ZOA presser on Carter - poll manipulation

http://www.zoa.org/sitedocuments/pressrelease_view.asp?pressreleaseID=394  ZOA presser 2 on Carter - visits to Syria, recognition of Hamas

http://www.standwithus.com/pdfs/flyers/ZOA-Carterbook.pdf  Condemnation of Carter book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid as untruthful on Standwithus/ZOA flyer

http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000301.html  Zionist Leftie Criticism of Carter

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Former_President_Carter_blames_media_proIsrael_1217.html  Rawstory.com: Includes Carters NY Times OP/Ed which tries to explain why Jews should trust Hamas and how they convince other Americans that Hamas is really bad even though they are not (barf)

http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2006/12/is-carter-anti-semite.html  Rosner article from Haaretz on trying to figure out how to sort antiJew Carter from a antiJew Mersheimer.

http://www.aish.com/societyWork/society/Jimmy_Carters_Jewish_Problem.asp  Deborah Lipstadt on antiJew Carter published by AISH

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340,L-3346022,00.html Levi Brackman, YNET calling Carter out

http://www.adl.org/israel/carter_book_review.asp Foxman/ADL He unjustly encourages Israel-bashers around the world. 
 

This is too great.

Let's focus on the word "change." We've all heard this word a hundred times over this election cycle, as Barack Obama has adopted it as a campaign slogan. Don't be fooled, folks. Obama has coined this term merely as an opposition word; simply to mean "anti-George Bush" and, given the unpopularity of the current president and the war in Iraq, many people give a warm welcome to change. Using this sentiment, Obama has created a facade to mask something that would otherwise be very familiar...

Let's be hypothetical for a minute.

Say Walter Mondale had used the mantra of change; that he had focused on reversing the incumbent administration. That wouldn't have worked too well, given the unpopularity of the previous president, Jimmy Carter. America knew how damaging Carter's policies were and how they failed during the 70's. Walter Mondale wanted a return to the Carter-era of super sized government, but America knew what that would cost. Enter Ronald Wilson Reagan, who brought genuine change that led to a restored faith in the presidency via limited government, competent and effective economic policies, and a strong foreign policy. The People had gotten the right kind of change with Reagan and in return they ushered in the largest electoral victory in the country's history.

Fast forward to the present: With the Gipper gone and Jimmy Carter's term seemingly forgotten, the ability to hark back to those failed policies seems restored. And I assure you folks, that is precisely what Barack Obama intends to do when he say change.

In an interview with NBC's Brian Williams, McCain said Obama seems to be running for a second Carter term:

Williams: Is it going to be tough to run with an incumbent party for the White House, given this economic backdrop?

McCain: I-- I think it's-- it's tough. But I think the American didn't, people didn't get to know me yesterday. They know me. They know that I have fought for restraining spending, which Senator Obama has been a big part of, with earmarking (UNINTEL) projects. They know that I have been a strong fiscal conservative, and they know I understand the challenges that they face.

They need a little break from-- from their gasoline taxes, and they -- and they know that -- we've got to get spending under control. And we've got to become independent of foreign oil. Sen. Obama says that I'm running for a Bush's third terms. It seems to me he's running for Jimmy Carter's second. (LAUGHTER)

It's an apt comparison. On July 15, 1979, Carter went on national television and gave what became known as his malaise speech. Among other things said this:

I'm asking you for your good and for your nation's security to take no unnecessary trips, to use carpools or public transportation whenever you can, to park your car one extra day per week, to obey the speed limit, and to set your thermostats to save fuel.

In Roseburg, Oregon recently, Obama sounded a lot like Jimmy Carter did when the former president gave that infamous speech:

We can't drive our SUVs and, you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on, you know, 72 degrees at all times, whether we're living in the desert or we're living in the tundra and then just expect every other country is going to say OK, you know, you guys go ahead keep on using 25 percent of the world's energy, even though you only account for 3 percent of the population, and we'll be fine. Don't worry about us. That's not leadership. [Transcript courtesy of CNN's Ballot Bowl]

Next thing you know, Obama will be talking about killer rabbits.

While all America breathed a collective sigh of relief when Jimmy Carter left the White House, (looking forward with real anticipation to the Presidency of Ronald Reagan which would bring common sense and respect back to government) little did we know that the latent ticking time bomb that Carter left behind would ultimately destroy all that Reagan would build.

Of all the far-left liberal programs and policies that Carter brought into the government, the stealth bomb that has had the most damaging impact on the stability and character of the country was Carter's establishment of the National Education Agency. Little by little over the last 30 years, America's public schools have been turned from expressions of the community's concerns for their children into propagandized, federally-controlled government schools. While the populace still want to believe that their neighborhood little red school house is still the best place for their children, the facts suggest otherwise. Just consider the stories of teachers sexually abusing the kids, which started popping up yearly, then monthly and now weekly. School shootings, which used to surprise and horrify us, are now a uniquely American rite of spring. Half the freshmen in most schools do not graduate. They had no choice but to go to school when they were six, but by the time they're 16 they've grown up enough to walk out.

What do these kids who are fleeing school in unprecedented numbers know about those schools that their parents either don't know or refuse to acknowledge? The kids know that the teachers are not teaching the core elements of education: reading, writing and arithmetic. The kids know that schools are teaching Sex Ed in kindergarten - and teaching sexual techniques to grade-schoolers that their parents never heard of. The kids know that their teachers are reading magazines in chemistry classes instead of teaching chemistry. Finally, these school kids know that so-called educators are using psychology methods to change how the children think - as well as what they think - about issues; pushing a perverse morality that would horrify their parents if those parents really stopped to think things through. Teachers and "educators" are more interested in changing kids' minds away from their parents' archaic principled conservative ideas than they are in teaching these kids about the real, heroic and ultimately noble history of the United States. Public school children no longer learn about the actual words in the Constitution, instead they are told how that the old white guys who wrote the Constitution are the real reason for all our problems.

So, when Obama claims that he has gone to 57 states - with one yet to go - no one notices the gaff, or if they notice, nobody cares. Jay Leno has found a plethora of people on the street to interview week after week who cannot identify countries, leaders of nations, or know about basic United States historical events.

As America's solid-citizen conservative parents continue to send their children to Federal-pattern government schools, they don't seem to realize that they are putting their children under the influence of the socialistic ideas that are routinely and "officially" taught in those schools. After all, children are expected to respect and learn from their teachers. It's been long noted in all cultures that students will become just like their teachers.

When concerned parents volunteer at their kids' schools, they are given busy work
- or they are used as cheerleaders intent on helping the already bloated school districts to bring in even more money by sending their children door to door to sell popcorn or gift wrapping for play equipment. Oddly, that 300 million bond issue was able to build palaces for administrators and to buy "blame American first" history textbooks, but it was just not enough to buy dodge balls for the school.

All the while, the courts have issued one decision after another, building an impenetrable body of case law that increasingly rules against parents having any influence on the instructions of their children - from a distorted history of America to sex-ed classes that include "safe-sex" how-to instructions. It has gone to the point that, in one Massachusetts decision, courts have ruled that parents have no say in when the child will be taught what. In essence, parents are told - basically - to hand their child over to the schools, at the door, and trust that Big Brother Knows Best.

Thanks to Jimmy Carter, we now have government schools which have been teaching state-sponsored liberalism for about 30 years, controlling the knowledge and attitudes of America's generations under 40 years of age. Those public school graduates are the *young people* who believe what Obama has to say when spews his socialism. When Congresswoman Maxine Waters advocates nationalizing an industry, or when Clinton demands Universal Health Care, these mis-educated now-young-adults have no idea that these extreme measures are not authorized in OUR constitution, but they are enshrined as public policy in the constitution of socialist nations around the world.

The ideals of individualism, of limited government, of self reliance and self responsibility are increasingly foreign to our citizens - especially citizens under age-40 - because this Jimmy Carter stealth bomb has, in fact, exploded in every school in America.

Yet, American business which are forced to spend over $9 billion dollars a year just to educate their employees - because those employees, victimized by our bloated education system were not educated - continue to support and send money to publicly funded institutions called public schools.

Schools across American have the nation's citizens under the gun - they take our property taxes with promises of improving education - yet fail to deliver educated citizens. These public schools are not educating our children - high school graduates cannot support themselves or their future families without further training and education.

Yet in spite of the evidence of a total breakdown of the country's educational system, most people will not even consider alternative systems or alternative educational choices. Instead, they patriotically continue send their children to public schools, and their tax dollars to school administrators. After all, that's what made this country great in the past: a good education system.

Welcome to the post-Carter era - an age when public education does more harm than good.