A place where escape goats go to play
https://www.notplanetrugby.com/
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:28 pm https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... dApp_Other
One of the most decent human beings to hold that office.
Spot on.Tichtheid wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:52 pmUncle fester wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:28 pm https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... dApp_Other
One of the most decent human beings to hold that office.
Carter and the next couldn't be more different.
I got annoyed when I latterly saw the debates between him and Reagan - there were complex issues at play and Reagan's team managed to make idiocy a virtue, something that continues to this day, it would seem.
An act of treason every bit as bad as Nixon's secret advances to Vietnam during actual war !!!Kiwias wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 10:44 pm An inherently decent man -- the best to inhabit the WH.
Gutless BBC glosses over the Reagan team's role in dealing behind the scenes with the Iranian govt to have the hostage release being delayed until after Reagan was inaugurated so he could claim the credit.
Yep, all of this.Biffer wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 10:57 pm His presidency had its problems, but he's the greatest former president America ever had. His foundation eliminated Guinea Worm, horrible disease that it is. He built affordable homes for decades. The effort he put into the Camp David accords and peace between Israel and Egypt (a peace that still survives more than forty years later). Civil rights advocacy, and so many other things. I have nothing but admiration for him.
A couple of acts that I'd just add are; his blanket pardon for those that fled the Vietnam draft to Canada; so that they could just come home for funerals of loved ones, without fear of being imprisoned; a simple, common thing, but an act of humanitarianism that showed his humanity; & the other is that at the height of the Three-Mile Island Crisis, when the PA Leadership was flapping around & issuing evacuation orders, & everyone was crapping themselves, he & his First Lady, flew to the site & met with team tackling the issue, & when America saw a former Nuclear Navy Engineer, not being afraid to put himself & his wife in potential harms way, they dialed back the panic, & were soon returning to their homes. That's Leadership !!!Biffer wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 10:57 pm His presidency had its problems, but he's the greatest former president America ever had. His foundation eliminated Guinea Worm, horrible disease that it is. He built affordable homes for decades. The effort he put into the Camp David accords and peace between Israel and Egypt (a peace that still survives more than forty years later). Civil rights advocacy, and so many other things. I have nothing but admiration for him.
Big thumbsup to both these posts.fishfoodie wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 11:11 pmA couple of acts that I'd just add are; his blanket pardon for those that fled the Vietnam draft to Canada; so that they could just come home for funerals of loved ones, without fear of being imprisoned; a simple, common thing, but an act of humanitarianism that showed his humanity; & the other is that at the height of the Three-Mile Island Crisis, when the PA Leadership was flapping around & issuing evacuation orders, & everyone was crapping themselves, he & his First Lady, flew to the site & met with team tackling the issue, & when America saw a former Nuclear Navy Engineer, not being afraid to put himself & his wife in potential harms way, they dialed back the panic, & were soon returning to their homes. That's Leadership !!!Biffer wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 10:57 pm His presidency had its problems, but he's the greatest former president America ever had. His foundation eliminated Guinea Worm, horrible disease that it is. He built affordable homes for decades. The effort he put into the Camp David accords and peace between Israel and Egypt (a peace that still survives more than forty years later). Civil rights advocacy, and so many other things. I have nothing but admiration for him.
His work after his term just showed what an honorable, decent & caring person he was, & how much we all missed out on with him not having a 2nd term.
Still under-estimating Reagan after all these years...Tichtheid wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:52 pmUncle fester wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:28 pm https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... dApp_Other
One of the most decent human beings to hold that office.
Carter and the next couldn't be more different.
I got annoyed when I latterly saw the debates between him and Reagan - there were complex issues at play and Reagan's team managed to make idiocy a virtue, something that continues to this day, it would seem.
Reagan understood the populace very well, that a jovial nature, a few well-placed jokes, and coming across as not dangerous works. Bit like Trump in many ways.Certain Navigator wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2024 8:34 amStill under-estimating Reagan after all these years...Tichtheid wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:52 pmUncle fester wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:28 pm https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... dApp_Other
One of the most decent human beings to hold that office.
Carter and the next couldn't be more different.
I got annoyed when I latterly saw the debates between him and Reagan - there were complex issues at play and Reagan's team managed to make idiocy a virtue, something that continues to this day, it would seem.
Certain Navigator wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2024 8:34 amStill under-estimating Reagan after all these years...
This.Uncle fester wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:28 pm https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... dApp_Other
One of the most decent human beings to hold that office.
There are not many politicians who are remembered most for what they do after they leave office, rather than what they achieve, or fail to achieve, in it. However, Jimmy Carter is one such example. In the 44 years since he left the White House he not only managed to rehabilitate his reputation, he became the nearest thing there is to a living saint. At least, that is certainly the case if you read some of the tributes made to him by people on the Left of politics.
He’s gone from being seen as a disastrous failure as president, to an example of a great humanitarian. His contemporary, British prime minister James Callaghan, experienced something similar. He was seen as a dreadful prime minister at the time, presiding over a country in deep decline and riven by industrial strife. I know. I was there. Yet Left-wing revisionist historians now portray him as some sort of political hero.
The same was the case with his chancellor, Denis Healey. When he had to beg the IMF to bail out Britain in 1976 he was the most reviled man in Britain, yet within a decade he had become a kind of avuncular figure, able to laugh at himself alongside Dame Edna Everage on many a chat show sofa. The fact that he presided over the highest inflation in our country’s history, an economy beset by strikes and known as “the sick man of Europe” was largely forgotten.
So, as you read all the tributes to Jimmy Carter, all lionising him for his unquestionably positive role in bringing about the Camp David Accords which brought (temporary) peace to the Middle East, let’s also remember that while there were many reasons why Ronald Reagan won the 1980 presidential election, Jimmy Carter was the main one.
In contrast to the ever-optimistic sounding Reagan, Carter had the sort of hang dog demeanour that would compete with Keir Starmer for depressing the hell out of everyone. He talked of a “crisis of confidence” afflicting the United States without seemingly having a single idea of what to do about it. It was dubbed the “national malaise” speech, although he never actually used the words.
Similarly, he failed to revive the US economy, bring down inflation or deal with the energy crisis. However, it was the Iran hostage crisis that cemented his reputation as a loser, something which Reagan took full advantage of.
While Carter’s post presidency good works, especially in Africa, did wonders to rehabilitate his reputation in the eyes of the world, this cannot mask the fact that his period in office was a failure, whatever the Left might have you believe.
"spin" being very much the operative word here.Kawazaki wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2024 7:03 pm This article puts a different spin on things...
There are not many politicians who are remembered most for what they do after they leave office, rather than what they achieve, or fail to achieve, in it. However, Jimmy Carter is one such example. In the 44 years since he left the White House he not only managed to rehabilitate his reputation, he became the nearest thing there is to a living saint. At least, that is certainly the case if you read some of the tributes made to him by people on the Left of politics.
He’s gone from being seen as a disastrous failure as president, to an example of a great humanitarian. His contemporary, British prime minister James Callaghan, experienced something similar. He was seen as a dreadful prime minister at the time, presiding over a country in deep decline and riven by industrial strife. I know. I was there. Yet Left-wing revisionist historians now portray him as some sort of political hero.
The same was the case with his chancellor, Denis Healey. When he had to beg the IMF to bail out Britain in 1976 he was the most reviled man in Britain, yet within a decade he had become a kind of avuncular figure, able to laugh at himself alongside Dame Edna Everage on many a chat show sofa. The fact that he presided over the highest inflation in our country’s history, an economy beset by strikes and known as “the sick man of Europe” was largely forgotten.
So, as you read all the tributes to Jimmy Carter, all lionising him for his unquestionably positive role in bringing about the Camp David Accords which brought (temporary) peace to the Middle East, let’s also remember that while there were many reasons why Ronald Reagan won the 1980 presidential election, Jimmy Carter was the main one.
In contrast to the ever-optimistic sounding Reagan, Carter had the sort of hang dog demeanour that would compete with Keir Starmer for depressing the hell out of everyone. He talked of a “crisis of confidence” afflicting the United States without seemingly having a single idea of what to do about it. It was dubbed the “national malaise” speech, although he never actually used the words.
Similarly, he failed to revive the US economy, bring down inflation or deal with the energy crisis. However, it was the Iran hostage crisis that cemented his reputation as a loser, something which Reagan took full advantage of.
While Carter’s post presidency good works, especially in Africa, did wonders to rehabilitate his reputation in the eyes of the world, this cannot mask the fact that his period in office was a failure, whatever the Left might have you believe.
I don't think I've seen anyone claim he was a good president. A good man, yes. His presidency had some disasters in it, not least Iran,which was a massive cockup both by him, for concentrating so massively on Egypt - Israel, but equally for. The US security services, who didn't know the Shah had cancer and assured him six months before the revolution that there was no possibility of revolution. The attempt to rescue the hostages was also a disaster, and highlighted the very poor state of US security services and their capability of working in a cross service manner, but Carter was smart enough to take on board what happened and set in motion the establishment of JSOC. But he also negotiated the peace between Israel and Egypt which still lasts and the arms reduction treaty with the Soviets which was later signed by Reagan,effectively the beginning of the end of the cold War. The Carter Doctrine is still the underpinning of US foreign policy in the gulf. In retrospect his presidency was mixed but all the good stuff was longer term impacts and all the bad stuff very immediate.Kawazaki wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2024 7:03 pm This article puts a different spin on things...
There are not many politicians who are remembered most for what they do after they leave office, rather than what they achieve, or fail to achieve, in it. However, Jimmy Carter is one such example. In the 44 years since he left the White House he not only managed to rehabilitate his reputation, he became the nearest thing there is to a living saint. At least, that is certainly the case if you read some of the tributes made to him by people on the Left of politics.
He’s gone from being seen as a disastrous failure as president, to an example of a great humanitarian. His contemporary, British prime minister James Callaghan, experienced something similar. He was seen as a dreadful prime minister at the time, presiding over a country in deep decline and riven by industrial strife. I know. I was there. Yet Left-wing revisionist historians now portray him as some sort of political hero.
The same was the case with his chancellor, Denis Healey. When he had to beg the IMF to bail out Britain in 1976 he was the most reviled man in Britain, yet within a decade he had become a kind of avuncular figure, able to laugh at himself alongside Dame Edna Everage on many a chat show sofa. The fact that he presided over the highest inflation in our country’s history, an economy beset by strikes and known as “the sick man of Europe” was largely forgotten.
So, as you read all the tributes to Jimmy Carter, all lionising him for his unquestionably positive role in bringing about the Camp David Accords which brought (temporary) peace to the Middle East, let’s also remember that while there were many reasons why Ronald Reagan won the 1980 presidential election, Jimmy Carter was the main one.
In contrast to the ever-optimistic sounding Reagan, Carter had the sort of hang dog demeanour that would compete with Keir Starmer for depressing the hell out of everyone. He talked of a “crisis of confidence” afflicting the United States without seemingly having a single idea of what to do about it. It was dubbed the “national malaise” speech, although he never actually used the words.
Similarly, he failed to revive the US economy, bring down inflation or deal with the energy crisis. However, it was the Iran hostage crisis that cemented his reputation as a loser, something which Reagan took full advantage of.
While Carter’s post presidency good works, especially in Africa, did wonders to rehabilitate his reputation in the eyes of the world, this cannot mask the fact that his period in office was a failure, whatever the Left might have you believe.
Iain DaleBiffer wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2024 7:23 pm
I don't think I've seen anyone claim he was a good president. A good man, yes. His presidency had some disasters in it, not least Iran,which was a massive cockup both by him, for concentrating so massively on Egypt - Israel, but equally for. The US security services, who didn't know the Shah had cancer and assured him six months before the revolution that there was no possibility of revolution. The attempt to rescue the hostages was also a disaster, and highlighted the very poor state of US security services and their capability of working in a cross service manner, but Carter was smart enough to take on board what happened and set in motion the establishment of JSOC. But he also negotiated the peace between Israel and Egypt which still lasts and the arms reduction treaty with the Soviets which was later signed by Reagan,effectively the beginning of the end of the cold War. The Carter Doctrine is still the underpinning of US foreign policy in the gulf. In retrospect his presidency was mixed but all the good stuff was longer term impacts and all the bad stuff very immediate.
But it's his post presidency theat I really admire him for. How many other people can you point to who led or enabled a successful effort to eliminate a disease? Salk perhaps, and Snow,but not many others.
You didn't put a source in there but it's an obvious attempt by a right winger to emphasise the negatives, and try to frame all of the praise in a different way by concentrating on the presidency, as if that was the most important part of his life. I bet he never got lowered into a nuclear reactor after core accident as part of a repair team, as Carter did. For that one act alone he deserves everyone's respect.
He spends a slightly sneering opening paragraph saying that other reports do that, then bizarrely insinuates that the peace between Israel and Egypt was temporary, although it’s still in place and that was during his presidency, and it was Reagan’s failure to capitalise on that peace deal that has led in part to the situation today. The deal committed Israel to a permanent deal for Palestine, to be negotiated after the Israeli Egypt treaty was signed. Reagan never pushed them on this commitment. To blame Carter for Reagan’s failure is a strange take on history.
92 financial crash in the UK, but not sure how that affected anywhere else.Niegs wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 12:48 am With that article's focus on gas prices and inflation back in the late 70s, is there anything Carter could have done to drastically swing things for the better? Similar with Biden now (Trudeau to come), people are largely concerned with the cost of living, and voted accordingly.
... I was just a kid in the 90s, but was there a global recession then too? There was here in Canada and the Conservatives went from a majority to just 3 seats. Was HW Bush's loss also due to economic woes?
Anyway, is there anything leaders can do to massively swing cost of living in a short period of time? Or are they doomed with a 'failure' brand when there really wasn't much they could do versus the global economy / power of mega corps?
That losing Canadian PM is now looked at fairly positively for his diplomatic successes - including a massive one: South Africa - and not so much the devastating loss.
Hugo wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2024 10:37 pm The article is based on a false premise - that people have tried to portray his Presidency as a success. Everyone knows Carter's Presidency was fraught with crises and that his post Presidency is where he has done his most consequential work.
Considering his post Presidency was more than ten times longer than his one term in office it's not much to ask that it be afforded more consideration in evaluating his legacy. If you judge people by their failures we are all going to come up a little short.
And you’re just posting misdirection after misdirection.Kawazaki wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 2:37 pmHugo wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2024 10:37 pm The article is based on a false premise - that people have tried to portray his Presidency as a success. Everyone knows Carter's Presidency was fraught with crises and that his post Presidency is where he has done his most consequential work.
Considering his post Presidency was more than ten times longer than his one term in office it's not much to ask that it be afforded more consideration in evaluating his legacy. If you judge people by their failures we are all going to come up a little short.
You're using a false premise to try to portray one!
If a person has a 50 year working life then the 4/8 years as the POTUS are likely to be the ones people focus on!
Not in this case.Kawazaki wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 2:37 pmHugo wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2024 10:37 pm The article is based on a false premise - that people have tried to portray his Presidency as a success. Everyone knows Carter's Presidency was fraught with crises and that his post Presidency is where he has done his most consequential work.
Considering his post Presidency was more than ten times longer than his one term in office it's not much to ask that it be afforded more consideration in evaluating his legacy. If you judge people by their failures we are all going to come up a little short.
You're using a false premise to try to portray one!
If a person has a 50 year working life then the 4/8 years as the POTUS are likely to be the ones people focus on!
Still hasn’t been a Gen X President either.Hugo wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 3:40 pm In my lifetime the two Presidents who I think were the best people, as in had the most integrity were George HW Bush & Carter. I'm more politically aligned with Carter but I read extensively on HW and he was a good man too, moderate and willing to compromise. Very gracious and well mannered. He had very little time for the wing nut element of the Republican party.
I bring this up because having just looked it up, they were both born in 1924 and they were of course both one termers. Given how much the baby boomers have monopolised the Presidency it's ashame we did not see more from Carter and Bush generation because they really were pretty noble men.
Remarkable. Obama was only off by 5 years though.Biffer wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 6:10 pmStill hasn’t been a Gen X President either.Hugo wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 3:40 pm In my lifetime the two Presidents who I think were the best people, as in had the most integrity were George HW Bush & Carter. I'm more politically aligned with Carter but I read extensively on HW and he was a good man too, moderate and willing to compromise. Very gracious and well mannered. He had very little time for the wing nut element of the Republican party.
I bring this up because having just looked it up, they were both born in 1924 and they were of course both one termers. Given how much the baby boomers have monopolised the Presidency it's ashame we did not see more from Carter and Bush generation because they really were pretty noble men.
Certain Navigator wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2024 8:34 amStill under-estimating Reagan after all these years...Tichtheid wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:52 pmUncle fester wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:28 pm https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... dApp_Other
One of the most decent human beings to hold that office.
Carter and the next couldn't be more different.
I got annoyed when I latterly saw the debates between him and Reagan - there were complex issues at play and Reagan's team managed to make idiocy a virtue, something that continues to this day, it would seem.
Although we’ve had three Gen X Prime Ministers and that hasn’t gone particularly well (Cameron, Truss and Sunak).Uncle fester wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 6:49 pmRemarkable. Obama was only off by 5 years though.Biffer wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 6:10 pmStill hasn’t been a Gen X President either.Hugo wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2025 3:40 pm In my lifetime the two Presidents who I think were the best people, as in had the most integrity were George HW Bush & Carter. I'm more politically aligned with Carter but I read extensively on HW and he was a good man too, moderate and willing to compromise. Very gracious and well mannered. He had very little time for the wing nut element of the Republican party.
I bring this up because having just looked it up, they were both born in 1924 and they were of course both one termers. Given how much the baby boomers have monopolised the Presidency it's ashame we did not see more from Carter and Bush generation because they really were pretty noble men.
