Talk:Jimmy Carter

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Is this the same president who got an award for brokering a deal with North Korea which they went on to break secretly? It had something to do with crediting him for ensuring that NK would not do something with nukes that would endanger the world, i.e., he got credit for preventing them. But we found out years later that they did the thing he got credit for preventing. Lemme google that . . . --Ed Poor 19:52, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

  • Carter met with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang and returned to America waving a piece of paper and declaring peace in our time. Kim, according to Carter, had agreed to stop his nuclear weapons development.
  • The Clinton appeasement program for North Korea included hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, food, oil and even a nuclear reactor. However, the agreement was flawed and lacked even the most informal means of verification.
  • In return, Kim elected to starve his people while using the American aid to build uranium bombs. The lowest estimate is that Kim starved to death over 1 million of his own people, even with the U.S. aid program. [1]

Yes, just what I thought. Now let's see if I can find a more credible sources than Ruddy. --Ed Poor 19:54, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

  • Carter had the U.S. Pentagon tell the Shah's top military commanders – about 150 of them – to acquiesce to the Ayatollah and not fight him.
  • The Shah's military listened to Carter. All of them were murdered in one of the Ayatollah's first acts. [ibid]

I didn't know about this one. Can anyone else verify this? It has the ring of truth, and I've always considered Carter the worst US president of the 20th century - especially on human rights, but this is not a blog. This is an encyclopedia, and everything must be verifiable and trustworthy. Someone else a bit less emotionally involved than I am should continue this. --Ed Poor 19:57, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

My impression is that Jimmy Carter was and is a conservative. His vilification was due to "Reagan conservatives" justifying Reagan's presidency. Reagan was actually a radical who tried, and in many ways succeeded, in turning back the clock. Carter supported the Vietnam War and is a religious man. His support of the ERA was tepid at best.

I have to take issue with the first line, "He is not only regarded by most Americans across the political spectrum as being the worst president of the 20th century, but he is also considered by many conservatives to be among the worst presidents in the entirety of American history."

That has the ring of the mealy-mouthed 'Some people say..." that is so common among journalists. It's just a vague impression that is not in any way quantified.

Is there a source for this information? Is there a recent survey of people saying who the worst president of the 20th century is? As it is, there's no foundation to this statement.

I think both Richard Nixon and Warren G. Harding get in line before Carter on the Liberal Bad President List. --BDobbs 23:41, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
Carter's reputation was in big trouble long before Reagan ever took office; let me give a real simple illustration why Jimmy Carter was, and remains roundly considered one of the most ineffective Presidents of late memory. Carter served from 1977 to 1981; in that time, the Democrats controlled both House & Senate, i.e. there was no divided government. The number one priority of the Congressional Black Caucus for each and every one of those four years, was passage and signing into law the Martin Luther King National Holiday. For some reason, Mr. Carter just could not get the job done. There must have been other priorities that prevented President Carter from convincing a majority of members of his own party, this was an important thing to get done during his first term of office. By contrast, Ronald Reagan, and the Republican controlled Senate, had no problem convincing the Democratically controlled House of Representatives to pass this legislation. And history records the facts of this matter, which is illustrative of Jimmy Carter's failed, ineffectual leadership. RobS 23:49, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
Not going to argue that Carter was a good president; he wasn't. But most polls of historians and the like consistently place Carter towards the bottom of the third quarter or top of the fourth quarter. Harding, Coolidge, Hoover and Nixon tend to score below him for presidents in the 20th Century.--Dave3172 00:01, 12 April 2007 (EDT)
Republicans discuss this often, of the three Democratic Presidents of recent memory, Johnson, Carter and Clinton, Repubs debate which was the worst. Oddly, the one who got impeached is usually considered the best when considering those three. RobS 00:13, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

It's amazing how much time "conservatives" waste on debating someone's "conservative" credentials, as opposed to how effective they were in making the United States a great nation.

Jimmy Carter made the US a great nation? i think your confusing him with Reagan.Bohdan

Not at all. You totally misunderstood my point, which is that the contributions the president made to the greatness of the United States is more important than whether they were liberal or conservative. By my standards, neither Carter nor Reagan were good presidents, although overall Reagan did more harm than Carter. Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, perhaps Wilson, Roosevelt, perhaps Eisenhower, were great presidents.

Exuse me but I think that the best word that describes Carter's Presidency is malaise. Also I don't understand why Coolidge is rated so low. -Additioner 17:08, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

UFO sighting

I removed the following commentary from the article: "most likely most likely the planet Venus"

I also changed the section title from belief in space aliens to UFO sighting. I am putting notice here in case others want to dispute these changes. Please discuss. Thanks. HeartOfGold 23:09, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

A lot of UFO sightings do turn out to be a particularly bright view of Venus. It would not be surprising. RSchlafly 00:49, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
Sure, but the article went from accusing Carter of believing in little green men, to an uncited explaination. While plausable, I'd prefer it be sourced, wouldn't you? HeartOfGold 01:05, 17 May 2007 (EDT)
Even if the flying sauce was a remote control hologram flown by the Martian version of Paul Wolfowitz, that language is suitable. RobS 10:14, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

According to the 1981 book 'MOre Rumor' it was most likely the planet venus. Czolgolz 10:53, 17 May 2007 (EDT)


Hey, the frame backround under his picture is red, shouldnt it be blue? I have no idea how to change it...JamesBenjamin 19:29, 29 June 2007 (EDT)

Scared of Reagan?

The Iranians were not scared of Reagan, Their whole objective was to embarass Carter. If the Iranians were so scared of Reagan, why did they support Hezbollah in its 1983 attacks on US Marines in Beirut? Carter tirelessly attempted to find a way to deal with the situation, but every attempt failed when the connection at the Iranian end fell apart. No one could have done much more, which is why presidential candidate Ronald Reagan continually criticized Carter, but never offered a word of explanation about what he would do.--BauerPhillip24 13:33, 25 March 2013 (EDT)