PDA

View Full Version : Bravo Joe!! Finally The Right Definition 4 Bush!



Gayle in MD
05-16-2008, 11:58 AM
Bush + Bull$hit

I have always been Proud of Joe Biden, but today, he has distinguished himself as the first American to correctly define the words that come out of George Bush's slandering, lying, hypocritical mouth!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/15/1027733.aspx

Way to go Joe!

McCain, on the same day, distinguishes himself as a perpetual flip-flipper, who attacks others for doing exactly what he stated our country should and must do, TALK with Hammas, Iran, and since this administration is presently TALKING with many terrorist sponsors all over the Middle east, you'd think they would have enough sense not to go to Israel, yapping against Democrats critisizing them for promising to do the same.

As a side note, Dana Perino, is the most sarcastic liar to ever represent this bunch of lying scoundrels to date. It was bad enough when she insulted Helen Thomas, the only member of the press to provide any protection of our democratic principles, or hold this lawless administration to account, but 87 years old, and the most respected reporter in Washington D.C.


The disgusting comments by Bush, including playing the Nazi Card, the Hitler Card, and the typical REpublican Fear Card...and in Israel, of all places!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/15/1025062.aspx
Joe Biden is a national treasure.

wolfdancer
05-16-2008, 01:04 PM
I think Joe's initial comment was even better...."bullsh*t"
And "God awful"....with the alleged directive from God to begin this war...was that a pun?
The rest of his assessment was right on.....
Playing the "Hitler Card"...trying to draw a comparison...what a
POSPOTUS

sack316
05-16-2008, 01:39 PM
Indeed, and then we have Obama today talking about what a bad idea it is to spread democracy... or at least that's how it came out.

Gotta give it to Hillary, good idea just going to the roundtable discussion with blue collar workers... reaching a very important demographic all the while letting everyone else shoot themselves in the foot.

Sack

Bobbyrx
05-16-2008, 01:54 PM
It might have been the best speech Bush has made. Right on the money.....and Obama's name wasn't even mentioned. I thought he could have been refering to Carter...

wolfdancer
05-16-2008, 11:55 PM
I think I'll print and frame "The best speech bush made" reply.
I keep getting flashbacks to "1984" reading that.
"Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia"

LWW
05-17-2008, 07:26 AM
Isn't it amazing how the far left claims that "BUSH LIED" every time he speaks ... yet when he speaks the unvarnished truth clearer than he ever has the far left sees that as an attack?

We have Jimmy and Nancy and others in the DNC tripping over themselves to see who can kiss the most terrorist state arse in an effort to undermine the US war effort and all the sheeple run to their defense for doing it.

Then, when it's pointed out that this is what they have done all the little sheeple scream foul for having it pointed out what they had just defended because the sheep herders told the sheeple they never did it.

And then they wonder why they are accused of being the masters of doublethink?

By stifling this war effort the far left has hurtled us down the chute to Armageddon.

I fear we passed the last exit sign in 2006 when the west held Israel back from marching to Damascus.

Meanwhile, Operation Carter seems to have succeeded in neutering the Lebanese democracy.

LWW

Gayle in MD
05-17-2008, 08:09 AM
About as Partisan a statement as I ever read. Bush is being bashed for his behavior from all sides, for using an event which was all about the celebration of another country's, to play the appeasement card, the Hitler card, and the fear card, basically being his usual idiotic self, full of hypocratic hubris.

If anyone is appeasing terrorists, he should go take a good long look in the mirror. He's appeasing Iraqi's, who have been laying IED's in the paths of our soldiers for five years, paying them with our money, and appeasing other countries that he has himself labeled as part of his Axis of Evil.

It was bad enough that after his supposed sacrifice of his golf game, pictures came out that proved that he had continued to play golf, but his attacks on others, given the colossal mess he has made of our foreign policy, and all the people who have been slaughtered because of it, with absolutely no gain resulting, and in face, losses of every kind, both domestic, and foreign, due to it, I'd say he's still the A-Hole he's always been, only more so.

Worse, so far, non of his hand-holding and kissing the cheeks of Arabs who have financed the slaughter of our troops, have panned out for America, in any way. He's reduced our country into a comical shadow of what it was before he crashed the White House.

The POTUS, a terrorist appeaser, and a torturer, that's just great! Too bad the truthdenying few who still jump on the defend Bush wagon, never stop to calculate that the numbers prove that it isn't just "The Left" who have decided that he's the worst, ever.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in Md.
So Glad I never Voted For The Worst President in History, and with the lowest approval rating in the history of polling!

Bobbyrx
05-18-2008, 10:37 PM
Still, the best speech Bush has made.

Bobbyrx

So glad I never voted for Jimmy Carter also!

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 06:34 AM
Carter didn't give us the highest deficits in history. Carter didn't lie us into a war. Carter didn't make destroy our international honor. Carter didn't appease countries that financed the killing of AMerican Troops. Carter didn't abuse his power by using the Department of Justice as his own personal tool for unlawful investigations against his political opponents. Carter didn't suspend the sentence of an American traitor who exposed the identity of a covert agent. Carter didn't spend our country into colossal debt. Carter didn't hold secret meetings with the American Oil Cartel to favor corporate interests over the public good. Carter didn't promise no nation building, and then go out and launch a three trillion dollar war, not the complete cost by a long shot. Carter didn't fail to respond to the worst natural disaster in our history. Carter didn't spy ilegally on Americans. Carter didn't torture innocent people. Carter didn't run this country into the ground, and ignore our crumbling infrastructure. Carter didn't go around hugging and kissing Arabs who were financing Sunnis while they kill our troops. Carter never went to foreign countries and make speeches against the opposing party on foreign soil. Carter didn't run a hidden secret government. Carter didn't get his brother to help him to throw an election. Carter didn't refuse to stand by the Army Field manual and break our Army. Carter didn't look the other way and fail to address our problems with energy. Carter didn't spend a nearly third of his tenure, vacationing. Carter engage us in a war where we lost thousands, for absolutely no gain. Carter didn't use cowboy diplomacy, thereby losing us many allies, and much admiration, and spread hatred of Americans all over the world. Carter didn't shred the Constitution. Carter didn't suspend Habeas Corpus, and have to be struck down by the supreme court. Carter didn't have family ties with terrorist nations. Carter didn't suck up to foreign families whose relatives attacked us on our shores, and provide protection for them. Carter didn't instruct our military to torture people, to corale innocent people, and send them to secret facilities where they would be tortured, and stand before the world as he was doing it, lying about it, over and over.

Believe me, you will NEVER see George Bush awarded with the Nobel Prize for Peace!

Gayle in Md.

cheesemouse
05-19-2008, 07:39 AM
What she said....LOL

pooltchr
05-19-2008, 07:52 AM
Gayle is correct! Carter did absolutely nothing!!!!!!
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Steve

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 07:56 AM
Carter cut oil comsumption nearly in half, and tried to set this country on a path for energy independence. It was your boy Reagan who left deficits after promising fiscal responsibility, financed terrorists, in secret, propped up Saddam, and incorporated the fundamentalist Christian dictators into our politics.

If only Bush had don'e NOTHING, we'd be way better off right now, we'd still be enjoying Bill Clinton's surplus.

DickLeonard
05-19-2008, 08:22 AM
Pooltchr sometimes nothing is better. If GWB was a poolplayer he would be known as the biggest mark playing. Just go to Washington there is a sucker there losing millions. The poolplayers would love him but the rest of the country would find him to be careless with our money.####

eb_in_nc
05-19-2008, 08:42 AM
Carter did give away the Panama Canal and now that vital water passage is controlled by a "company" owned and operated by communist China. Carter did pressure the Shah of Iran – a long time friend of the U.S. - to leave his country and then denied him asylum and medical treatment for his illness which fanned the flames of fanatic anti-American Islamic fundamentalists in Iran. Carter did approve of the failed military rescue of hostages held in the American Embassy to Iran and then, his failure to negotiate for their release left American Citizens languishing in Iranian jails for a year. Carter did cost American farmers a fortune by cancelling grain exports to Russia. Carter believes he can single handedly change a terrorist nation by initiating peace talks with the Hamas - to no avail.

GWB may not win the Nobel Peace prize, but you won't see him breaking bread with established terrorists. Maybe his next trip will be to Venezuela to visit Chavez with Mel Gibson and Sean Penn!

DickLeonard
05-19-2008, 09:27 AM
EB in NC I really don't think our owning any part of another country is right. I think we still owe the blacks a mule and 5 acres. God only knows what we owe the American Indians, we never made a TReaty with them that we didn't break. Our ability to forget our words could be diagnosised as Alzhimer of Treaties.####

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 09:31 AM
Bush dances and kisses with them, instead of just talking. Most of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi ARabia, now Bush is dancing and kissing the Saudi Princes, what do you call that?

The Cheney's and the Bush's have long been in business with rogue nations in the Middle East. Saddam, for example, was propped up by Reagan. I don't see any Democrats breaking bread with terrorists, however, there does seem to be a huge effort by those from the right to prefer to dig back into history and create their own cherry picked intelligence, rather than discussing the issues of the day, like for example how we're going to dig our way out of this mess that Bush and Republicans have created for this country, NOW!

Saudi Arabia has financed Sunni insurgents who were killing our troops! Bush is paying them off, to try to get them to stop the killing, THAT is the definition of appeasement, whether you want to admit it or not.

No President can be compared to George Bush when it comes to failed policies, lies and incompetence, and long term damage to this country. Most of our economic problems have been created by Bush's economy, his borrowing from communists, his three trillion dollar war, that McCain wants to spend another who know how many more trillion to continue. Our economic problems cannot be addressed without acknowledging that the war, the debt, and the corporate welfacre promoted by Bush, have put is in the hole, add to that the destablizing effects on oil in the Middle East, and no re-writing of history will suffice. We're in a mess, and BUSH put us there, period.

Every single Republican president left this country either in a recession, or heading for one, including Reagan.


Carter came back and relayed the willingness of Hamas to negotiate. He was on a peace mission, and was bashed by this WHite House, which is presently sending their own people to talk with terrorists, and rogue nations.

Bush is full of $HIT, and so is McCain. McCain had lobbyists who had represented rogue nations, with links to terrorist organizations, right in his own campaign.

Gayle in Md.
"If the Republican brand were dogfood, it would be taken off the shelf."

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 09:39 AM
When it comes to breaking his word, and breaking the word of America's treaty agreements, Bush has set a whole new precedent.

"No more Nation Building"

"Fiscal Responsibility"

"Smaller Government"

Yeah, Right!

His father had to raise taxes, and break his word, because he had to deal with the results of Reganomics to get this country out of the hole Reagan put it in!

Republicans always yap about Government being the problem, then they get into office, and prove it!

right now our emergency response capability is zilch, and we are presently severly and dangerously at risk, unable to respond to a national disaster, but when it hits, and there is another Katrina like no response response, they will blame whatever poor democrat has had to to take over from the devastation this country has suffered from Republican misadventures.

http://www.firethelobbyists.com/

Mr. Straight Talk, BWA HA HA HA...with a campaign full of Lobbyists who represented countries accused of inhumane activities! Rogue countries, that support terrorists. Which is worst, Bush kissing them, or McCain hiring their business representatives?

"If the Republican brand were dog food, it would be taken off the shelf!"

Gayle in Md.

Deeman3
05-19-2008, 10:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Carter cut oil comsumption nearly in half, and tried to set this country on a path for energy independence. </div></div>

<span style="color: #FFCC66"> I was not aware we had ever had our oil comsumption cut in half by any adminsitration.</span>

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 10:35 AM
I should be more specific, foreign imports, is what I meant.
http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/carter/essays/biography/4
Carter’s main achievement involved energy policy, though he would receive little credit for it during his term. Despite the lip service paid by American presidents to reducing energy dependence, U.S. oil imports had shot up 65 percent annually since 1973. In 1976 the nation was consuming one-quarter of all Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) production. The U.S. remained wasteful in energy use, with consumption per capita 2.3 times the average for nations in the European Economic Community and 2.6 times Japan's. Carter set out to reduce this dependence.

The president got Congress to pass the Emergency Natural Gas Act, which would authorize the national government to allocate interstate natural gas. He created a Department of Energy to regulate existing energy suppliers and fund research on new sources of energy, particularly sustainable (wind and solar power) and ecologically sound sources. His Energy Security Act created the U.S. Synthetic Fuels Corporation, which would provide $20 billion in joint ventures with private industry. Carter signed his first energy package into law on November 9, 1978. The deregulation of oil and natural gas prices that resulted would lead to a vast increase in the supply of energy in the 1980s, and consequently a lowering of prices.

During Carter’s term, however, the actions of the OPEC oil cartel (foreign oil producers) resulted in an increase in oil prices, from $13 a barrel to over $34. With America so dependent on oil, this huge price increase resulted in a run-up in inflation. Carter asked Congress to accelerate stockpiling 500 million barrels of crude oil in a national security reserve, setting target date by end of 1980 instead of 1982 (the deadline set by the Ford administration). The administration also developed new conservation measures that would sharply reduce industry’s use of fuels, as well as automobile mileage standards. Strip mining would now be regulated by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, a victory for environmentalists.

Carter had other successes in energy policy, particularly in nuclear energy policy, in which he was an expert. He got Congress to abolish the powerful Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, a step that would make it easier to block breeder reactors and move toward light-water reactors of the kind favored by the administration. Carter won his route for a soon to be constructed oil pipeline in Alaska. He killed funding for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor, because the plutonium reactor technology would increase the risk of nuclear proliferation if adopted elsewhere in the world. Instead, Congress authorized and funded a shutdown of the reactor.

By April 1980, he had gotten much of his second energy package through, including a Crude Oil Windfall Profits Tax (with revenues designated for the general Treasury but not for specific energy projects), which would expire in 1993 or before, if the full amount of $227 billion had been collected. But there were two major defeats: Congress overrode a presidential veto of a bill that Congress had passed repealing a $4.62 per barrel oil import fee -- the first time in twenty-eight years that a Congress had overridden a veto by a president from the majority party. It also defeated the Energy Mobilization Board that Carter had proposed to cut through "red tape" in developing new sources of energy.

While Americans had to endure long gas lines during the summer of 1979 and higher prices at the pump -- effects of the Iranian revolution of that same year -- Carter’s program by and large worked. Consumption of foreign oil did go down, from 48 percent when Carter took office to 40 percent in 1980, with a reduction of 1.8 million barrels a day. When Carter left office there were high inventories of oil and a surplus of natural gas, delivered by a more rational distribution system. There was greater oil exploration than before, leading eventually to an oil glut and a drop in prices—which Carter's Department of Energy had not predicted. Between 1980 and 1985, domestic production would increased by almost 1 million barrels a day, while imports of crude oil and petroleum products declined from 8.2 to 4.5 million barrels a day. His goal of reducing U.S. dependency on foreign sources succeeded, at least temporarily.

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 10:37 AM
Camp David Accords

The greatest foreign policy success of the Carter presidency involved the Middle East. After the Yom Kippur War of 1973 between Israel and its Arab enemies, Egypt and Syria, the Israelis had gradually disengaged their forces and moved a distance back in the Sinai Peninsula. They were still occupying Egyptian territory, however, and there was no peace between these adversaries. In the fall of 1978, Carter invited Israel's Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egypt's President Anwar Sadat to sit down with Carter at Camp David, a rural presidential retreat outside Washington. Between September 4 and September 17, 1978, Carter shuttled between Israeli and Egyptian delegations, hammering out the terms of peace. Consequently, Begin and Sadat reached a historic agreement: Israel would withdraw from the entire Sinai Peninsula; the U.S. would establish monitoring posts to ensure that neither side attacked the other; Israel and Egypt would recognize each other's governments and sign a peace treaty; and Israel pledged to negotiate with the Palestinians for peace.

Not since Theodore Roosevelt's efforts to end the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 had a president so effectively mediated a dispute between two other nations. Begin made several concessions to Carter, including agreeing to the principle of Egyptian sovereignty over the entire Sinai, and complete Israeli withdrawal from all military facilities and settlements. In return, Carter agreed to provide Israel with funds to rebuild Israeli military bases in the Negev Desert. Because Sadat and Carter had positions that were quite close, the two men became good friends as the conference progressed. Sadat also made some concessions to Carter, which alienated some of his own delegation. His prime minister resigned at the end, believing that Sadat had been outmaneuvered by the Americans and Israelis.

The Camp David Accords, initialed on September 17, 1978 and formally signed in Washington on March 26, 1979, were the most significant foreign policy achievement of the Carter administration, and supporters hoped it would revive his struggling presidency. Although Begin and Sadat received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 for this action, Carter received no significant political benefit from this achievement.


Relations with the Soviet Union

Carter hoped to continue the policy of détente with the Soviet Union, but his appointment to the National Security Council (NSC) post of Brzezinski gave him an adviser who was profoundly suspicious of Soviet motives, and led Carter into several major confrontations with the Russians. Carter ordered a massive five-year defense buildup that the Soviets found provocative. In turn, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to quash a Muslim-based rebellion outraged the United States. The guerrilla war that ensued put a crimp in arms control talks between Moscow and Washington. The two sides had signed SALT II, a treaty limiting the deployment of nuclear missiles, and the treaty had been sent to the Senate. After the invasion it was clear that the Senate would take no action. Carter withdrew the treaty, but Moscow and Washington agreed to abide by its terms, even though neither side ratified it.

In retaliation for the USSR invading Afghanistan, Carter cut off grain sales to the Soviet Union and ordered a boycott of the 1980 Moscow Summer Olympic Games by U.S. athletes. Because much of the public considered this to be more punitive towards American swimmers and runners than Soviet leaders, Carter's response only reinforced his weak image.


Recognition of China

Carter continued to expand American contacts with communist China, granting the communist regime formal diplomatic recognition on January 1, 1979. To do so required the severing of diplomatic ties and withdrawal of recognition of non-communist Taiwan (also known as the Republic of China). Moreover, Carter unilaterally revoked the 1955 Mutual Defense Treaty with the Republic of China, effective January 1, 1980. Carter’s treaty abrogation was challenged in the federal courts by conservative Republicans. In the federal district court his opponent’s won. However, in an appeals court the government’s position that Carter had the power to abrogate the treaty without Senate consent prevailed. The Supreme Court then threw the entire case out without rendering any decision (on a technicality involving the standing to sue of Republican Senator Barry Goldwater), thus leaving the constitutional victory with the president by default. Carter’s recognition of China significantly reduced tensions in East Asia. Hard-liners in China were replaced by communists who were more interested in economic growth than in military confrontations. Beneficial trade relations were established between China and the U.S., leading to huge imports of finished consumer goods from China, in return for U.S. lumber and foodstuffs.

To substitute for diplomatic relations with Taiwan, Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act. It provided for the creation of an American Institute on Taiwan, which bought the old American embassy. Institute staffers consisted of newly retired American foreign service officers experienced in Far Eastern Affairs. Taiwan established a corresponding institute in Washington, D.C., staffed with its retired diplomats. Thus each side continued with quasi-diplomatic relations, even though the pretense was that they had cut off the relationship. The U.S. continued to supply arms to Taiwan to defend itself from the mainland, a step that kept some friction in U.S.-Chinese relations.


The Iran Hostage Crisis

Iran had become important to the 20th century chessboard for two reasons. Oil had been discovered there in 1909, and it was considered the geographic cork that kept Russia in the Asian bottle and out of the Middle East. The British, through Anglo-Dutch Shell Oil, had reaped Iranian oil for almost nothing through mid-century, but in 1951 a volatile new prime minister, Mohammad Mossadeq, threw them out. The American government became concerned that Iran was now ripe for a Soviet takeover. The Central Intelligence Agency staged a coup that toppled the prime minister and restored power to the Pahlavi ruling dynasty, whose monarch at the time had been reduced to a figurehead under Mossadeq. This leader, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlava, ("Shah" meaning "ruler") was allowed to govern once rights to 80 percent of the oil were ceded (transferred) to American and British interests. This made the Shah a Western puppet in the eyes of many Iranians.

But the Shah, emboldened by American support over the years, became increasingly tyrannical towards his people. He outlawed rival political factions and deployed one of the world's most feared secret police agencies. This resulted in countless human rights violations. By the time of the Carter presidency, discontent with the Shah was widespread in Iran, and so was civil disorder. The Shah's most virulent opposition was led by a radical Islamic group that wanted to create a government adhering more strictly to their faith's teachings. Their supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, had been in exile in Paris for fifteen years. But by early 1979 the conservative Islamic movement had become so strong that the Shah was forced to flee Iran and turn over power to a new group of Western oriented technocrats. The Ayatollah returned to his homeland soon afterward and was instantly installed by a million Iranians marching on the capital as the nation's undisputed leader.

The Shah was now in exile in Mexico, dying from cancer, and President Carter allowed him to come to the United States for refuge and medical treatment. This enraged Muslim fundamentalists in Iran. In November 1979, Islamic student militants loyal to the Ayatollah overran the American embassy in Teheran, Iran's capital. They seized sixty-six Americans and held them hostage, demanding the Shah's return to stand trial. In addition they demanded money and property that the Shah had stashed outside Iran, and an apology from America, who they considered "The Great Satan."

Carter took immediate action. He froze billions of dollars of Iranian assets in the United States, then began secret negotiations, but nothing worked. The manner in which television network news reported on the crisis served to build up America's frustration. Mobs burned the American flag and shouted "Marg bar Amerika" ("Death to America") on nightly television news broadcasts in Iran. These film clips were rebroadcast in the United States, creating feelings of apprehension for the hostages and anger at Iran. By counting the number of days that the hostages had been held in capacity, nightly announcements such as "America Held Hostage, Day Eighty-nine" focused on the prolonged aspect of the situation. Americans grew impatient with the seemingly ineffective president who could not win the hostages' release. The Iranians heightened this political tension by making bright promises and then going back on them almost daily.

Finally, Carter approved a secret military mission to attempt to free the hostages. Unfortunately, three of the eight helicopters carrying the assault force developed mechanical problems. One crashed into a transport aircraft in a remote desert in Iran, killing eight soldiers. After the failure, Iran dispersed the hostages to hideouts throughout the country, making rescue impossible. The failure of the rescue mission doomed Carter politically. It seemed to reinforce the widespread notion that he could not get things done, and that America had lost its edge. His approval rating dropped badly and he was up for reelection within a year, when Republicans would make a major issue of his performance in the crisis. Near the end of his administration Carter concluded an agreement that led to the release of the hostages. His executive agreement with Iran specified that the U.S. would unblock all Iranian funds, and the U.S. and Iran would utilize a tribunal at the Hague, Netherlands, to settle their financial claims. The U.S. also promised not to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran. In return, Iran agreed to release the hostages.

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 10:42 AM
You are quite wrong about much of what you've written.

The Shah was welcomed here by Carter,

Camp David Accords

The greatest foreign policy success of the Carter presidency involved the Middle East. After the Yom Kippur War of 1973 between Israel and its Arab enemies, Egypt and Syria, the Israelis had gradually disengaged their forces and moved a distance back in the Sinai Peninsula. They were still occupying Egyptian territory, however, and there was no peace between these adversaries. In the fall of 1978, Carter invited Israel's Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egypt's President Anwar Sadat to sit down with Carter at Camp David, a rural presidential retreat outside Washington. Between September 4 and September 17, 1978, Carter shuttled between Israeli and Egyptian delegations, hammering out the terms of peace. Consequently, Begin and Sadat reached a historic agreement: Israel would withdraw from the entire Sinai Peninsula; the U.S. would establish monitoring posts to ensure that neither side attacked the other; Israel and Egypt would recognize each other's governments and sign a peace treaty; and Israel pledged to negotiate with the Palestinians for peace.

Not since Theodore Roosevelt's efforts to end the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 had a president so effectively mediated a dispute between two other nations. Begin made several concessions to Carter, including agreeing to the principle of Egyptian sovereignty over the entire Sinai, and complete Israeli withdrawal from all military facilities and settlements. In return, Carter agreed to provide Israel with funds to rebuild Israeli military bases in the Negev Desert. Because Sadat and Carter had positions that were quite close, the two men became good friends as the conference progressed. Sadat also made some concessions to Carter, which alienated some of his own delegation. His prime minister resigned at the end, believing that Sadat had been outmaneuvered by the Americans and Israelis.

The Camp David Accords, initialed on September 17, 1978 and formally signed in Washington on March 26, 1979, were the most significant foreign policy achievement of the Carter administration, and supporters hoped it would revive his struggling presidency. Although Begin and Sadat received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 for this action, Carter received no significant political benefit from this achievement.


Relations with the Soviet Union

Carter hoped to continue the policy of détente with the Soviet Union, but his appointment to the National Security Council (NSC) post of Brzezinski gave him an adviser who was profoundly suspicious of Soviet motives, and led Carter into several major confrontations with the Russians. Carter ordered a massive five-year defense buildup that the Soviets found provocative. In turn, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to quash a Muslim-based rebellion outraged the United States. The guerrilla war that ensued put a crimp in arms control talks between Moscow and Washington. The two sides had signed SALT II, a treaty limiting the deployment of nuclear missiles, and the treaty had been sent to the Senate. After the invasion it was clear that the Senate would take no action. Carter withdrew the treaty, but Moscow and Washington agreed to abide by its terms, even though neither side ratified it.

In retaliation for the USSR invading Afghanistan, Carter cut off grain sales to the Soviet Union and ordered a boycott of the 1980 Moscow Summer Olympic Games by U.S. athletes. Because much of the public considered this to be more punitive towards American swimmers and runners than Soviet leaders, Carter's response only reinforced his weak image.


Recognition of China

Carter continued to expand American contacts with communist China, granting the communist regime formal diplomatic recognition on January 1, 1979. To do so required the severing of diplomatic ties and withdrawal of recognition of non-communist Taiwan (also known as the Republic of China). Moreover, Carter unilaterally revoked the 1955 Mutual Defense Treaty with the Republic of China, effective January 1, 1980. Carter’s treaty abrogation was challenged in the federal courts by conservative Republicans. In the federal district court his opponent’s won. However, in an appeals court the government’s position that Carter had the power to abrogate the treaty without Senate consent prevailed. The Supreme Court then threw the entire case out without rendering any decision (on a technicality involving the standing to sue of Republican Senator Barry Goldwater), thus leaving the constitutional victory with the president by default. Carter’s recognition of China significantly reduced tensions in East Asia. Hard-liners in China were replaced by communists who were more interested in economic growth than in military confrontations. Beneficial trade relations were established between China and the U.S., leading to huge imports of finished consumer goods from China, in return for U.S. lumber and foodstuffs.

To substitute for diplomatic relations with Taiwan, Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act. It provided for the creation of an American Institute on Taiwan, which bought the old American embassy. Institute staffers consisted of newly retired American foreign service officers experienced in Far Eastern Affairs. Taiwan established a corresponding institute in Washington, D.C., staffed with its retired diplomats. Thus each side continued with quasi-diplomatic relations, even though the pretense was that they had cut off the relationship. The U.S. continued to supply arms to Taiwan to defend itself from the mainland, a step that kept some friction in U.S.-Chinese relations.


The Iran Hostage Crisis

Iran had become important to the 20th century chessboard for two reasons. Oil had been discovered there in 1909, and it was considered the geographic cork that kept Russia in the Asian bottle and out of the Middle East. The British, through Anglo-Dutch Shell Oil, had reaped Iranian oil for almost nothing through mid-century, but in 1951 a volatile new prime minister, Mohammad Mossadeq, threw them out. The American government became concerned that Iran was now ripe for a Soviet takeover. The Central Intelligence Agency staged a coup that toppled the prime minister and restored power to the Pahlavi ruling dynasty, whose monarch at the time had been reduced to a figurehead under Mossadeq. This leader, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlava, ("Shah" meaning "ruler") was allowed to govern once rights to 80 percent of the oil were ceded (transferred) to American and British interests. This made the Shah a Western puppet in the eyes of many Iranians.

But the Shah, emboldened by American support over the years, became increasingly tyrannical towards his people. He outlawed rival political factions and deployed one of the world's most feared secret police agencies. This resulted in countless human rights violations. By the time of the Carter presidency, discontent with the Shah was widespread in Iran, and so was civil disorder. The Shah's most virulent opposition was led by a radical Islamic group that wanted to create a government adhering more strictly to their faith's teachings. Their supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, had been in exile in Paris for fifteen years. But by early 1979 the conservative Islamic movement had become so strong that the Shah was forced to flee Iran and turn over power to a new group of Western oriented technocrats. The Ayatollah returned to his homeland soon afterward and was instantly installed by a million Iranians marching on the capital as the nation's undisputed leader.

The Shah was now in exile in Mexico, dying from cancer, and President Carter allowed him to come to the United States for refuge and medical treatment. This enraged Muslim fundamentalists in Iran. In November 1979, Islamic student militants loyal to the Ayatollah overran the American embassy in Teheran, Iran's capital. They seized sixty-six Americans and held them hostage, demanding the Shah's return to stand trial. In addition they demanded money and property that the Shah had stashed outside Iran, and an apology from America, who they considered "The Great Satan."

Carter took immediate action. He froze billions of dollars of Iranian assets in the United States, then began secret negotiations, but nothing worked. The manner in which television network news reported on the crisis served to build up America's frustration. Mobs burned the American flag and shouted "Marg bar Amerika" ("Death to America") on nightly television news broadcasts in Iran. These film clips were rebroadcast in the United States, creating feelings of apprehension for the hostages and anger at Iran. By counting the number of days that the hostages had been held in capacity, nightly announcements such as "America Held Hostage, Day Eighty-nine" focused on the prolonged aspect of the situation. Americans grew impatient with the seemingly ineffective president who could not win the hostages' release. The Iranians heightened this political tension by making bright promises and then going back on them almost daily.

Finally, Carter approved a secret military mission to attempt to free the hostages. Unfortunately, three of the eight helicopters carrying the assault force developed mechanical problems. One crashed into a transport aircraft in a remote desert in Iran, killing eight soldiers. After the failure, Iran dispersed the hostages to hideouts throughout the country, making rescue impossible. The failure of the rescue mission doomed Carter politically. It seemed to reinforce the widespread notion that he could not get things done, and that America had lost its edge. His approval rating dropped badly and he was up for reelection within a year, when Republicans would make a major issue of his performance in the crisis. Near the end of his administration Carter concluded an agreement that led to the release of the hostages. His executive agreement with Iran specified that the U.S. would unblock all Iranian funds, and the U.S. and Iran would utilize a tribunal at the Hague, Netherlands, to settle their financial claims. The U.S. also promised not to interfere in the internal affairs of Iran. In return, Iran agreed to release the hostages.

<span style="color: #000066">Jimmy Carter cut our foreign oil comsumption nearly in half. he got our hostages out, and he didn't stoop to secret sales of arms to rogue terrorist groups to do so.

You are about as accurate as the guy on the Chris Mathews Show. </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Shah was now in exile in Mexico, dying from cancer, and President Carter allowed him to come to the United States for refuge and medical treatment. </div></div>



/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Bobbyrx
05-19-2008, 10:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="color: #FF0000">At work so only had a minute. A quick read reveals </span> Carter didn't give us the highest deficits in history.<span style="color: #FF0000"> BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS. </span>
Carter didn't spend our country into colossal debt. <span style="color: #FF0000">BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS </span>
Believe me, you will NEVER see George Bush awarded with the Nobel Prize for Peace! <span style="color: #FF0000">Like that legend of peace Yasser Arafat......oh wait a minute...you mean he did?..... </span>

Gayle in Md. </div></div>

Gayle in MD
05-19-2008, 11:29 AM
Bobby,
You can deny the facts all you want. No president has left this country with the debts and deficits of this administration. Bush's performance does not come near to Carter's in terms of reducing oil consumption, implimenting conservation standards, or bring peace accords to the table.

Bush has accomplished none of that. In fact, everything he has done has been bad for our interests here and in the middle east.

Gayle in Md.

Bobbyrx
05-19-2008, 02:37 PM
I'm not denying the facts. I agree with the facts you stated about the debts and deficits of this administration. If you hit him about immigration and not protecting our borders, spending, how he has run the WOT, his insane Part D prescription drug plan, I would be right with you. I don't like defending Bush because I don't think he has a clue, but when you pull out the war for oil, the hidden secret government, secret meetings with big oil, ordering our troops to corale and torture innocent people on purpose, personally allowing Bin Ladin's family to fly out after 9/11, Halliburton, spying on our own citizens (why I don't know) etc, I don't see these as "facts"

Sid_Vicious
05-19-2008, 02:45 PM
The way I see this comparison between bush and Carter is this...bush is totally dishonest and Carter was honest. For ANY American to support the dismal outcome from a so-called Christion as Bush proclaims, is totally ass-in-ign. When y'all show up at the Throne, answer God when he asks this question, "Why did you not see My Truths as written concerning lies and the sin of it all?"

No, none, Professed Christian should avoid that question, even with comparisons to worse examples. It don't work that way, trust me...sid

Deeman3
05-19-2008, 03:32 PM
It really was a good speech and exactly the truth the world needed to hear about the plans to engage the enemys of Isreal by Obama and others. No preliminary conditions? Maybe that's exactly where Obama needs to be to see how they respect and treat people who agree to meet with them. Maybe that's Hillarys plan all along, to get him tomeet with the very people who want to destroy us and our allies.

pooltchr
05-19-2008, 06:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I should be more specific, foreign imports, is what I meant.


The president got Congress to pass the Emergency Natural Gas Act, which would authorize the national government to allocate interstate natural gas. <span style="color: #FF0000">Did it bring down the cost of natural gas? </span> He created a Department of Energy to regulate existing energy suppliers and fund research on new sources of energy, particularly sustainable (wind and solar power) <span style="color: #FF0000">Wind and solar are still insignificant when it comes to meeting the countries energy needs. 40 years and not much to show for it. </span> and ecologically sound sources. His Energy Security Act created the U.S. Synthetic Fuels Corporation, which would provide $20 billion in joint ventures with private industry. Carter signed his first energy package into law on November 9, 1978. The deregulation of oil and natural gas prices that resulted would lead to a vast increase in the supply of energy in the 1980s, and consequently a lowering of prices. <span style="color: #FF0000"> temporarily, maybe...but it hasn't done much good lately!</span>

During Carter’s term, however, the actions of the OPEC oil cartel (foreign oil producers) resulted in an increase in oil prices, from $13 a barrel to over $34. <span style="color: #FF0000">If we had cut our use of foreign oil by 50% as you state, this shouldn't have been much of an issue. But it wasn't Carter's fault...it was OPEC! </span> With America so dependent on oil, this huge price increase resulted in a run-up in inflation. <span style="color: #FF0000">Wait a minute...I thought Carter cut our dependence of foreign oil. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif </span> Carter asked Congress to accelerate stockpiling 500 million barrels of crude oil in a national security reserve, setting target date by end of 1980 instead of 1982 (the deadline set by the Ford administration). <span style="color: #FF0000">So now we have a strategic reserve of oil that we don't use. That really only limits supply. </span> The administration also developed new conservation measures that would sharply reduce industry’s use of fuels, as well as automobile mileage standards. <span style="color: #FF0000">So car makers built smaller cars that nobody wanted to buy, and forced the prices up on the cars we did want to buy. Good move! </span> Strip mining would now be regulated by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, a victory for environmentalists. <span style="color: #FF0000">The environmentalists are idiots. We have so much coal available, but they don't want us to mine it, and they don't want us to burn it! </span>

Carter had other successes in energy policy, particularly in nuclear energy policy, in which he was an expert. He got Congress to abolish the powerful Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, a step that would make it easier to block breeder reactors and move toward light-water reactors of the kind favored by the administration. <span style="color: #FF0000"> And just how many new reactors have been built since this happened??? (I'll give you a hint...it starts with ZERO)</span> Carter won his route for a soon to be constructed oil pipeline in Alaska. <span style="color: #FF0000"> Now if only we could drill for oil in Alaska and send it down to the lower 48....</span> He killed funding for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor, because the plutonium reactor technology would increase the risk of nuclear proliferation if adopted elsewhere in the world. Instead, Congress authorized and funded a shutdown of the reactor. <span style="color: #FF0000">Nuclear poser is the single greatest opportunity we have to actually reduce our use of fossil fuels....and again, I ask...How many reactors have we built since the '70's??? </span>

By April 1980, he had gotten much of his second energy package through, including a Crude Oil Windfall Profits Tax (with revenues designated for the general Treasury but not for specific energy projects), which would expire in 1993 or before, if the full amount of $227 billion had been collected. <span style="color: #FF0000">OK, so he raised taxes on oil companies </span> But there were two major defeats: Congress overrode a presidential veto of a bill that Congress had passed repealing a $4.62 per barrel oil import fee -- the first time in twenty-eight years that a Congress had overridden a veto by a president from the majority party. <span style="color: #FF0000">I guess enough members of congress understood that Carter was WRONG!!!!! </span> It also defeated the Energy Mobilization Board that Carter had proposed to cut through "red tape" in developing new sources of energy. <span style="color: #FF0000">That's a joke. When has ANY government board cut through red tape? Most of them end up just creating more of it!!! </span>

While Americans had to endure long gas lines during the summer of 1979 and higher prices at the pump -- effects of the Iranian revolution of that same year -- Carter’s program by and large worked. Consumption of foreign oil did go down, from 48 percent when Carter took office to 40 percent in 1980, with a reduction of 1.8 million barrels a day. <span style="color: #FF0000"> Down from 48% to 40% is hardly what I would consider cutting it nearly in half? I knew you had a hard time with economics, but I thought you had a better comprehension of simple math!!!</span> When Carter left office there were high inventories of oil and a surplus of natural gas, delivered by a more rational distribution system. There was greater oil exploration than before, leading eventually to an oil glut and a drop in prices—which Carter's Department of Energy had not predicted. Between 1980 and 1985, domestic production would increased by almost 1 million barrels a day, while imports of crude oil and petroleum products declined from 8.2 to 4.5 million barrels a day. <span style="color: #FF0000">Refresh my memory...Who was president between 1980 and 1985? </span> His goal of reducing U.S. dependency on foreign sources succeeded, at least temporarily. <span style="color: #FF0000"> The tax stimulous rebate deal will help "temporarily". Does that mean Bush did something good???????????</span>



</div></div>

Where do you find all this crap?????????????
Steve

eg8r
05-19-2008, 08:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I should be more specific, foreign imports, is what I meant.</div></div>LOL, when caught in revisionist history you do backpedal quick. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif


eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 04:55 AM
From 8.2 to 4.5 million barrels a day is close to a one half reduction, which was, according to the article, a direct result of Carter's plan.

I think people who can substract 4.5 from 8.2, not you obviously, recall that Carter tried very hard to get this country to deal with the threat of dependence on foreign oil, and move to higher cafe' standards, and alternative sources of energy, Reagan came in and immediately took the solar panels off the White House, and began selling arms to Iran in secret, and to others. That is exactly when our problems in the Middle East began to grow into what we face now.

http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/carter/essays/biography/5

Republicans are a joke. They spread more weapons around the world than any other group, send food to the axis of evil, North Korea, while people right here are hungry, lie about selling arms for hostages, and accuse Democrats of being soft on terror, when they speak about using more diplomacy, than bombs, what Republicans love more than anything else. They present us with a presidential nominee who is in bed with lobbyists who recieved millions from Saudi Arabia, and Burma Military, presently blocking aid to their citizens, Mayanmar, and others, and whose entire campaign is operated by lobbyists, and expect us voters to think he's different from the idiot we've been suffering with for the last seven plus years.

These are the people Bush dances with and kisses:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/31/AR2008033102691.html

Look up the recent land swap to help McCain's donors get govt land ready for development, Keating five, or his forced relocation of over 12,000 Native Americans to give the coal rights to his big coal buddies. Bashing Jimmy Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize Winner, who was an honest man who certainly has devoted his life to helping others, and promoting peace, and human rights, and is head and shouldiers above John McCain, or Bush, in both honesty, and integrity, and performance, is something that only a blind Republican, who has forgotten the secret arms for hostages deals, that REagan LIED about, could do. Carter didn't send this country in the debths of debt, nor did he lie us into an un-necessary war with fixed intelligence, as was stated in the British Memo, and then break its army.


We would not be in the mess we're in right now if Republicans weren't owned by big oil, and Reagan, laid the groundwork for many of our present problems, not only with illegals entering our country by the droves, but also with our continued dependence on foreign oil.

McSame is a complete nut, and a nasty one at that. He's done nothing but lie throughout his campaign, not only about Iraq, but also about Democrats. Obama has never said he would talk with terrorists. Bush's own people are talking with Iran, Lybia, Syria, Lebonnon, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and doing nothing but throwing money at a problems we would not even face today, had Carters plan to remove our dependency on foreign oil, been followed, instead of a REpublican coming in and pushing for big business, against the best interests of America.


When you create a war, and end up paying the enemy to stop shooting your soldiers, and pay bonuses to get those soldiers to go and fight, if that isn't throwing money at a problem I dont know what is.

But then, you think we could have won the war in Vietnam, a civil war, which the enemy stated would have been fought till the lasst man dropped, that's about the dumbest statement I've ever read on this forum, nect to your glowing reports of ho well Republicans are doing raising money....is that a mth problem? When a Republican leader states that if their party was dogfood, voters would be taking it off the shelf, I suppose that's a sign that the country approves of Republican actions. Usually when products are taken off the shelf it's because their poison.

Dream on....

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 05:08 AM
Obama never said he would meet with terrorists, and corrected his statement to include preliminary conditions. McCain and Bush have lied, but that's nothing new, is it? Bush has his own people talking with the same countries, including Iran.

Did Reagan talk with Iran, Iraq, the Russians? This is just the kind of Republican Bull$hit that this country is fed up with. I'm glad it happened, because it showed both Bush and McCain at their worst. Fear mongers, who lie left and right. Do you want a man in the White HOuse whose top operatives have collected mulit millions from Saudi Arabia? No wonder his wife won't release her finances, there's no telling what terrorist countries she's hooked up with. She's not going to get away with keeping secrets about her business associates, and with McCain's lobbyist campaign, there's no tellimg what she's hiding.

So, how about McCain's top advisors, over fifty in his campaign, lobbyists, and some having made multi millions in payment for representing Saudi Arabias interests, and countries like Mayanmar?

Tell me, how many people are so stupid that they don't know the Soviet Union doesn't exist? How man informed Americans don't know the difference between Sunni and Shiia? Bush and McCain bash Obama for stating that he intends to follow the suggestions by people like Baker, and others from the 9/11 panel, and Bush hugs and kisses and dances with Saudi Arabian Princes, when most of the 9/11 hi-jackers were FROM Saudi Arabia? Pahleeeze!

As usual, Bush broke with traditional honor, and bashed a political opponent in a foreign country. Then, he tried to back off what he said, when everyone, even right wing pundits, said that his own people in the White House acknowledged that he was speaking about Obama. But then, We've seen him use Veterans memorial services to his own political advantage, and to promote his policies. The man has no honor. No one with honor could have a sleazy POS like Karl Rove as his right hand man.

It's pretty funny for Republicans to continue to try to get people to think they are strong on terror, yep, they are experts at creating the terrorist numbers, and expanding it so that it franchises itself around the world, and takes on a whole new life and purpose, that's been proven. Semantics don't change the reality of performance, and that's why 80 percent of Americans know that this administration has taken this country in the wrong direction. They understand that Iran is stronger because of Bush's policies, al Qaeda is stronger, and American allies are laughing about how stupid we are, and angry over what a mess we've made.

There is a reason why historians are already calling Bush the worst president in history, and we all know, that the Republican Majority covered his ass, and helped him dig us into the mess we're in right now. Throwing money at problems for no good result is what Republicans have done throughout this administration. It's a Republican thing.

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 05:23 AM
I agree, Sid, and Carter's administration was demonized by the right wing press, too. No body ever gave him the credit he deserved for eventually getting our hostages out, and safely back home, and all his efforts to head off this moment in history, where we are beholden to foreign terrorist countries for oil.

When you think that most of the 9/11 hi-jackers were from Saudi Arabia, and our military states that the Saudis have sent money to support the Sunnis in Iraq, that have been killing our soldiers, and Bush has been sword dancing with, kissing and hugging the Saudis for seven years. I'd call that worse than anything that he and McCain are trying to lay on obama.

We're in a mess, and George Bush has led us down this wrong way path. We may have to put up with these Rovarian types on here, that do nothing but echo the chimps lies, and revise history, but eighty percent know what's up.

Terror is the tool of terrorists, and terror is the political strategy used by Republicans, so what does that make them?

Gayle in Md.

Deeman3
05-20-2008, 07:08 AM
Gayle,

After you spun Carter's presidency into getting the hostages released and even credited him for saving half our oil use (then imports, Carter was the driver behind the oil embargo?) /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif
I just can't take your comments on Obama or the Republicans seriously. I was with you, and listened to critiques, but the far left, outlandish claims over the evils of everyone Republican is just too much to read and believe.

Let's just see how right you are, again, in the election in November.

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 07:17 AM
Well, let's just hope that McCain isn't in the White House to expand the destruction of checks and balances which George Bush has damaged through his unprecedented us of signing statements, designed to supercede Copngressional power, and put the president on the level of KING.

http://www.abanet.org/media/docs/signstatereport.pdf

We are dealing with a broken government, where the outragous power mongering of the Cheney/Bush administration has removed our representation through our representatives, and given vast powers to the President as the sole interpreter of law, and given him the power to simply state that he will not abide by the laws enacted by our representatives. What worries me most, is that not one of the candidates has addressed this issue, and not one American has askded about it, including the news media.

I don't want any president to have that kind of power, regardless of whether he/she is a Dem or Repub, it is not in the interest of Democracy.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 07:26 AM
Carter did get the hostages released. His policies did reduce our foreign imports, and provided for an effort to increase gas mileage. I'd say had we continued that approach, we'd be much better off right now.

As for the evils of Republicans, one only has to look at the number of Republicans that are in jail, headed to jail, or barely escaped jail, and BTW, Rove may soon be one of those, as he will be held in contempt for refusing to honor Congressional subpoena.

I just wonder why it is that righties never question what is being hidden. This administration has been the most secret of any, according to most scholars, and I for one do not think they are above oversight.

WE will be lucky if they don't attack Iran in order to try to scare the publicn into voting for McCain, although it wouldn't surprise me one bit!

Love,
Gayle

eb_in_nc
05-20-2008, 07:42 AM
Corrupt democrats - They do exisit

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/04/democrat-mollohan-sees-assets-increase.html

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 07:50 AM
I never said they didn't, only that current numbers surely show that this todays Republican Party has surely shown that they are far more morally corrupt, interms of arrests, prosecutions, and convictions, than the current Democratic party, according to statistics. When a party claims that if they're elected they will restore fiscal responsibility, and the moral high ground, and then bahaves according to what we have all witnessed, I think Americans can see the handwriting on the wall.

Gayle in Md, not since Watergate have we seen this, another supposed moral high ground Republican administration....

Deeman3
05-20-2008, 07:51 AM
eb,
They do not want to hear that.

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 08:12 AM
I think I've achnowledged before that Democrats have had their scandals, I just don't think a BJ is on the same level as outing CIA agenst, lying the country into a war, and nine trillion dollar deficits.

Like verything, it's a matter of degree, and it seems to me that while Republlicans are the best bs slingers around, so full of outrage over a married man having an affair, that didn't hur the country one bit, they are readily able, with all their supposed high moral ground, to completely overlook everything from toe tapping, to drunk driving lies, to lies that send this country into wars, and lies about what is happening on the ground, such as...
"The oil will pay for it."
"The Insurgency is in it's last throes"
"Just a few dead-enders."
"These aluminum tubes could only have been for the puspose of...."
"No one ever thought about people flying planes into buildings before 9/11"

You can understand, I'm sure, after all the outrage over Clinton lying about some hanky panky, and Republicans accusing Democrats of throwing money at problems, why Republicans, with their nine trillion dollar deficits, look so utterly arrogant, hypocritical and decietful, now.

Gayle in Md.

eb_in_nc
05-20-2008, 08:14 AM
Deeman, apparently not.

eb_in_nc
05-20-2008, 08:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think I've achnowledged before that Democrats have had their scandals,
Gayle in Md. </div></div>

Here's more of your type to ponder the goodness they brought to their civic service.
More Fun Demo's (http://www.boycottliberalism.com/Scandals.htm)

Bobbyrx
05-20-2008, 08:56 AM
I agree Deeman. Trying to spin Carter into someone who needs to be on Mt. Rushmore is comical. All credibility is lost.

Bobbyrx
05-20-2008, 09:11 AM
The only thing Carter did to get the hostages released was to get out of office. He did do one thing better than any president in modern history. Remember the misery index. " No man responsible for giving a country a misery index that high, had a right to even ask to be President" - Jimmy Carter on Gerald Ford. So when elected he proceded to run it up to an all-time high of 21.98%. What a joke

Deeman3
05-20-2008, 09:17 AM
Bobby,

The real strange thig is that they may actually blow this election. With the worst situation Republicans have faced in 40 years and all the advantages they should have, these people have and are continuing to melt down. You can tell by the increased out of the blue attacks on McCain, who is not my favorite guy, they sense the mistakes they have made and are trying to trade the far left for the hard working white vote while Obama's position on guns, the UN, Taxes, etc. are dooming them to another failed election. Now, I'm not sayng they can't still win but how could any sane patry shoot themselves in the foot so badly, alienate such a large portion of their base when they had it so good. Then expect the American people to beleive they can run the country with the oversight help of the United Nations?

If they win, we deserve it for our loose spending and loss of conservative principals over the last few years. However, they may be making a mistake that the country is ready to trade foolish republican spending for even more foolish demoicratic spending.

We shall see, Gayle has predicted a big win in the Presidential race! We have been told to "Lay Off" the candidates wife while she is free to critize us all? Personally, I never wanted to lay on her. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 09:17 AM
You exaggerate my position on Carter. I didn't say he was the best, just not the worst, since that label will forever belong to George Bush, unless McSame gets in there, that is, which will provide us with another four years of the worst policies, ever, repeated by the most unbalanced president in history.

Back to the Bush accusations, I notice none of you respond to the fact that both Bush, and McCain, condemned Obama for doing exactly what they themselves have put their stamp of approval upon, Bush, taking it to a new level with his dancing, kissing and hugging of the heads of countries which finance the killing of American Troops, and finance al Qaeda, and the Talliban.


Even the republican pundits laughed over Bush trying to back off his accusation against Obama. Some of them stated that they were given a heads up from White House aides, that Bush would be making some attacks on one of the candidates for the presidency.

Don't you guys ever get tired of all the lies? It's so obvious, even you must notice it.

Gayle in Md.
Carter was a good man, not the best president in history, but not the worst. That is George Bush.


Gayle in Md.

eb_in_nc
05-20-2008, 09:18 AM
Hey Bobby exactly, I like the way you think (or that you do think rather than spew opinion).

Gayle talks about Bush kissing the Saudis but fails to remember Carter kissing Leonid Bezhnev, former USSR dictator on the cheek. He then brown-nosed the Soviet Dictator and sucked in every lie he was told. And then when the USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Jimmy replied, "He lied to me." What an a$$!

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 09:48 AM
The real strange thig is that they may actually blow this election. <span style="color: #000066">It could happen, and if it does, it will serve them right for jumping up too fast to support the weaker of the two candidates, as I have said before. </span> With the worst situation Republicans have faced in 40 years, <span style="color: #000066">uh, let's change that to the worst situation Republicans have created in forty years... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span> and all the advantages they should have, these people have and are continuing to melt down. <span style="color: #000066">Yeah, Obama with 75,000 people showing up to see him is in a real meltdown, and the loss of atleast three traditionally Republican seats, LOL&gt; </span> You can tell by the increased out of the blue attacks on McCain, <span style="color: #000066">not out of the blue, friend, I've been writing about McCain's mental problems for years, and as I said, come for a visit, and not only will you discover how much I love to fuss over men, especially my hubby, but also I'll invite some of my many federal employees, who have told me these stories about McCain for decades! They are all pool shooters, and you'll surely like them, and see for yourself, they are no BSers. </span> who is not my favorite guy, they sense the mistakes they have made and are trying to trade the far left for the hard working white vote while Obama's position on guns, the UN, Taxes, etc. are dooming them to another failed election. <span style="color: #000066">So, is that an official prediction, Deeman? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </span> Now, I'm not sayng they can't still win but how could any sane patry shoot themselves in the foot so badly, alienate such a large portion of their base when they had it so good. <span style="color: #000066">Gee, are we speaking of Democrats, or REpublicans??? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </span> Then expect the American people to beleive they can run the country with the oversight help of the United Nations? <span style="color: #000066">Too bad Bush ignored the UNited Nations, we'd be trillions of dollars richer right now, huh? </span>

If they win, we deserve it for our loose spending and




rvative principles over the last few years. However, they may be making a mistake that the country is ready to trade foolish republican spending for even more foolish demoicratic spending.



[color:#000066]LOL Deeman, there isn't enough money left for the Dems to outdo the repubs spending. It's all gone!



We shall see, Gayle has predicted a big win in the Presidential race! We have been told to "Lay Off" the candidates wife while she is free to critize us all? Personally, I never wanted to lay on her.



[color:#000066]LOL...hey, I don't like Michelle one bit. I've already acccused her of the nastiest comment so far, remember?

Now just calm down, Deeman, and take a deep breath. Just because even the Republicans are calling themselves dogfood, you may still have a chance to win. Who Knows, maybe Bush and McCain will be singing bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran together, so they can make another Republican attempt at scaring those cowardly percentages of AMericans into another win, with their terrorist tactics!

Gee, didn't we used to have presidents who encouraged...

"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself!"

Instead of, "Be afraid, be very afraid."

Oh, that was back when AMerica stood rproud on its record of humanitarian tradition, before we became a rogue nation, that illegally occupies sovereign countries, to allow our corporate oil cartel to close their no bid refining contracts, right?

hey, Michelle Obama can dish it out, so she is going to have to learn how to take it, and then we'll see if she had any business making those remarks about Hillary. She was very unfair, and I don't like her one bit. I'm actually looking forward to seeing the right wing press slash her up, she's almost as bad as Huckabee!

Gayle in Md.
No dogfood for me, though! It's poison!

Deeman3
05-20-2008, 09:56 AM
Gayle,

I don't think, particularily, if McCain wins, I feel I have won. I have always felt he is too far left and, you may eb rigfht, a loose cannon. i think the American people have to select their poison, the lesser of two evils. I really don't know who that is at ths point. Both have big negatives. One will change the debate (Obama) for at least 4 years, the other may or may not make the rigfht changes needed to get us on the right track.

My dog in this race is America and I really don't know who will be the least bad for us at this point.

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 10:19 AM
I understand how you feel, believe me.

I do have a dog in this race, our troops. That's all I care about. Screw the economy, screw the moral BS, and screw both parties, I want our people out of the Iraq civil war, which Iran, and al Qaeda is loving! I would not vote for McCain for lots of reasons. His position of continuing with Bush's Iraq policy, completely discredits his intellect, in my view.

We've all learned not to predict in this election, but we do know the the vast majority think the war has been a mistake, I'll be surprised if they go in the booth and vote for the guy that wants to stay with a losing proposition, with no good possible outcome for America.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
05-20-2008, 10:27 AM
Your tirades lack any proof. You're just completely out of control, aren't you?

Jimmy Carter is a good man. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He succeeded in his Camp David Accord, and he warned us about dependency on foreign oil.

The Republicans are the ones connected to the Oil Cartel, and the rogue nations. Remember the Marianna's? Remember Delay's funny business, his golf trips? Remember Abramoff? Remember all those Republican sex addicts? I think you should be praying for all those sinners in your party, instead of bashing poor ol' Jimmy Carter.

Chill out, sonny!

sack316
05-20-2008, 11:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bobby,

The real strange thig is that they may actually blow this election. With the worst situation Republicans have faced in 40 years and all the advantages they should have, these people have and are continuing to melt down. </div></div>

I can't help but feel that had they pushed Edwards from the very beginning, that the election in November would be rather pointless. He probably would have just ran away with the whole general election. I don't know if the "enlightened" ones just felt it was time to really show some change via the two current choices or what, but they darn sure are making this much more difficult than it should be. I think Edwards would have not only had the left simply because of his party affiliation come November, but he also would have pulled a fair amount of republican voters as well. Hell, I probably would vote Edwards over McCain myself. But as it's gonna be, I'll simply be voting based on who I'm not supporting, rather than who I'd like.

Sack

eb_in_nc
05-20-2008, 11:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your tirades lack any proof. You're just completely out of control, aren't you? <span style="color: #FF0000">Yes, about as out of control and you are.</span>

Jimmy Carter is a good man. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He succeeded in his Camp David Accord, and he warned us about dependency on foreign oil. <span style="color: #FF0000">Yeah and so did Gore for global warming. Shows you the substance of what goes into the Nobel prize these days. Maybe we should have MENSA vote on this for future candidates?</span>

The Republicans are the ones connected to the Oil Cartel, and the rogue nations. Remember the Marianna's? Remember Delay's funny business, his golf trips? Remember Abramoff? Remember all those Republican sex addicts? I think you should be praying for all those sinners in your party, instead of bashing poor ol' Jimmy Carter. <span style="color: #FF0000">I understand the republicans are the woes of your society. That's pretty clear to all of us. It's so easy to find snippets of things to throw at one another, I've done it and you do it constantly. The problem with your way of so called "debating" is that you expect these snippets to stand on their own being way out of context with reality. Kind of like your own thought process. I can ask you can you remember this and that about your own parties constituents, but I chose not to because I don't want to play your game of factoid logic.
</span>
Chill out, sonny! <span style="color: #FF0000">I will if you will granny.
</span>
</div></div>

Deeman3
05-20-2008, 01:02 PM
I think Biden would have been their best and most electable choice. I think they underestimate the left swing, at least how big it was, and now will have to play to the center, something earlier statements by Obama make it difficult to do.

A couple more judges appointed and your guns are gone.....

Bobbyrx
05-20-2008, 01:19 PM
Speaking of the U.N., here is something interesting to read. link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080516/pl_nm/un_usa_racism_dc). We should expect a lot of this type thing if Obama gets elected. I really love the line "His campaign has increased turnout among black voters but has also turned off some white voters in a country with a history of slavery and racial segregation." Funny how that would apply to, oh, about every country in the history of the world.

Deeman3
05-20-2008, 01:31 PM
Yes, I was aware of this move. It may backfire on attitudes toward Obama if it is perceived that his UN folks are trying to embarrass the U.S. into a race based vote.

Hey, they have made most other moves wrong, why no this? At least some of us who might have stayed at home may be energised to go vote simply to help protect the court appointments and UN moves like this form defining us.

Bobbyrx
05-20-2008, 01:38 PM
A-men

eg8r
05-20-2008, 02:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think, particularily, if McCain wins, I feel I have won.</div></div>This election is a lose lose situation for the Reps. I have not seen a single person on this board state they are pro-McCain yet Gayle throws that around as if we have all banded together under McCain.

eg8r

eg8r
05-20-2008, 02:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We've all learned not to predict in this election</div></div> So when should we believe you? When you tell us that the Dems are going to crush the Reps in this election or when you tell us you are not predicting anything?

eg8r

DickLeonard
05-20-2008, 03:19 PM
Gayle I do have to admit we have pissed away a ton on money on the Primaries.

I think George W Bush's brain lapses coupled with his stumblimg Speech Patterns will keep the Republican gatherings to the size of a small picnic. While Obama will continue to draw huge crowds.####

Gayle in MD
05-21-2008, 06:45 AM
LOL, well, I just hope we end up with a president who is competent enough to do more than send "Meschesches" (Bush speak for message) and signals, gee, he can pronounce that one.

McCain represents more Republican styled politics of personal destruction, and I think Americans have had enough of their sleazey tactics. The best that could happen is more of Karl Rove, more of George Bush, and more of McCain, proving to the country that he's just like them, as he has done so far.

When a presidential candidate doesn't even know who is running the country which is the most dangerous, and the most outrageous in their statements, (Iran) that's pretty bad.

Republicans in his party are not really behind him, and don't like him, some even stating that his emotional problems should exempt him from even running for the presidency.

He is going along with George Bush's disgraceful refusal to provide the same assistance for our troops, who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq, which we have provided in other foreign campaigns. Seventy percent want us out, and regardless of how the Republicans lie about what Obama, and Clinton have promised as regards getting them out, most know that McCain is doing what Republican Politicians do best, lying about Democrats.

You don't have to be a genius to figure out that when your Army is broken, your country is not behind your policy, and your deficits are no longer manageable, it's time to come home.

Obama, and/or Clinton, both want to do what most Americans have wanted all along, GET bin Laden! This mess in Iraq was totally stupid, and as Kerry said long ago, it was the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and most of America can now see that that was the correct policy statement, since our own intelligence experts have provided us with plenty of FACTS, proving the damage to our best interests.

Change is what people want, and no Republican is going to give it to them, that's for sure.

Love,
Gayle