Skip to main content

Let's get right into it...


“America as the No. 1 warmonger”: President Jimmy Carter talks to Salon about race, cable news, “slut-shaming” and more

David Daley
Editor-in-Chief
Salon.com
Thursday, Apr 10, 2014 05:30 AM PDT

Jimmy Carter’s new book, “A Call to Action,” is an urgent and bold addition to a library of some two dozen books he’s written in his post-presidency, as one of our finest global citizens. It’s subtitled “Women, Religion, Violence and Power,” and Carter is unafraid to tackle controversial topics: sexual assault on campus and the military; religious leaders of all faiths who use sacred texts to justify oppression; punitive prison sentences weighted against the poor and against racial minorities; American drone wars and endless military operations...

Daley mentions a bit more about the many topics discussed, including:  "...the Republican war on women; criticism of President Obama which echoes critiques of his own administration; and about how his grandson, Jason, might reverse the tide of white Southern males toward the GOP. Asked why white males have embraced the Republicans, Carter, 89, was unequivocal. 'It’s race,' he said. But on other topics, especially about Fox News and the Republican war on women, Carter’s answers were equally direct but more surprising. And wait until you hear his response about 'slut-shaming...'"

Proceeding into the interview, Daley quotes the following from the President's latest book, "...there’s an inevitable chasm between the societal leaders who write and administer criminal laws and the people who fill the jails." He then asks Carter, "What role do you think race plays in the perpetuation of that chasm?"

Carter: Well, the statistics still show that race plays a major difference. Not only are African-American and Hispanic people poverty-stricken comparatively speaking, but they suffer the plight of being incarcerated much more than other people. I think I mention in [the book] that since I left the White House, 800 percent more black women are now incarcerated than when I was president of the United States. And this means that most of the people that are in prison for a long period of time, a vast majority of them are Hispanics, blacks or they are mentally [challenged] in some way. So this means that with the people who are in power who write the laws, administer the laws and enforce the laws, they are pretty well excluded from any equal treatment within the justice system...

Here's a little more from the brief--but still "wide-ranging"--interview...

Daley: We also rarely acknowledge the loss and suffering that our policies have caused around the world. You’re specifically critical of our drone wars, and of the innocent people we’ve killed as almost collateral damage. You’ve traveled to so many countries through the Carter Center: At home, we talk of American exceptionalism, of this duty to bring our great democracy to the rest of the world. Do we see ourselves accurately and understand our own history? And how does that square with how the rest of the world perceives us?

Carter: (laughs) No. The rest of the world, almost unanimously, looks at America as the No. 1 warmonger. That we revert to armed conflict almost at the drop of a hat — and quite often it’s not only desired by the leaders of our country, but it’s also supported by the people of America. We’ve also reverted back to a terrible degree of punishment of our people rather than the reinstitution of them back into life. And this means that we have 7.5 times as many people now in prison as when I left the governor’s mansion. We’re the only country that has the death penalty in NATO; we’re the only country in this hemisphere that has the death penalty, and this is another blight on our country as far as unwarranted, unnecessary and counterproductive violence are concerned...

IMHO, it's well worth your time to read the whole interview for more gems from our best ex-President ever!

#            #            #

Originally posted to http://www.dailykos.com/user/bobswern on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 09:04 AM PDT.

Also republished by Sluts.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks bobswern. President Carter deserved more (33+ / 0-)

    credit than he received. He was one of our most decent and moral presidents I think. Intelligent and hard working.  

    Sadly, Richard Vigarie  (or maybe it was his predecessors)  and the right-wing, had geared up the early versions of the right-wing's  grass roots mail out fund raising apparatus, and right-wing AM radio, and was trashing President Cartter on a daily basis before we Democrats had internet or any comparable infrastructure to respond.

    If you think back, President Carter was ahead of his time on Solar energy and renewables. Ronald Reagan had the White House solar collectors ripped out.

    Thanks for doing this.

    "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

    by HoundDog on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 09:21:17 AM PDT

    •  I owe Jimmy Carter a lot: He gave amnesty to... (19+ / 0-)

      ...draft "dodgers" and to those of us who openly refused the draft and did prison time for it, and he established energy programs, including one that provided a three-year job for me at the Solar Energy Research Institute. A job Ronald Reagan got rid of along with several hundred others.

      But it is often forgotten that Carter too was a strong believer in an "all of the above" energy policy. In those days before global warming was an issue for more than a handful of scientists, that policy perhaps made more sense. But far more federal money at the time went to "clean coal" and synfuels (like oil shale) than to renewables.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:16:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  At least some of those realities have to do... (13+ / 0-)

        ...with Jimmy Carter's engineering background, and his work on nuclear submarines (a big portion of what he did during his 10 years in the Navy), before entering politics.

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:41:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You make good points MB, and maybe I am too (7+ / 0-)

        forgiving, but I make certain adjustments for the times.

        He was well ahead of his time in his openness to sustainable and renewable energy.

        He also had an intellectual openness and scientific openness to him that was admirable. I know and worked with the fellow he chose to review all of our nations energy models, who then later went on to work helping other nations develop sustainable energy plans.

        President Carter's philosophy with regard to foreign policy was also more progressive than many realize. He was aware of the unintended side effects of excess and indiscriminate use of force, and promoted an attitude of academic inquiry among many military officers I witnessed who had worked with him.

        They ended up being the philosophical opposites of the Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney "let's bomb the bastards into oblivion" approach" and retaliate first with 2,000 pound bomb and ask questions later approach (in Gaza for example)

        So, yes, he supportted coal, synfuel, and nuclear, which I oppose now.  But, I view that a little bit like reading that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson had slaves, terrible and wrong, yes, but they were men of their times, and have to be judged at least in part by the standard of their day.

        For example, I do not believe the had the same level of full life cycle, whole system analysis of how stupid synfuels, and heavy tar sands are back then. Global warming was not known to be such a critical issue.

        Do you see what I'm saying?

        "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

        by HoundDog on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:00:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  For the most part, I agree with you. As I noted... (7+ / 0-)

          ...next to nobody was thinking about global warming at the time.

          The reason I bring it up is that when people mention Carter's programs on renewables, which were far-sighted, they often decry synfuels and "clean coal" (and sometimes nuclear), without realizing, or at least not pointing out, that Carter's energy program was mostly NOT about renewables.

          In general, except for his early support of the Nicaraguan contras, Carter's foreign policy was far and away an improvement over his predecessors just for the face he recognized human rights as a key element of that policy.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:32:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Agreed. (4+ / 0-)

            "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

            by HoundDog on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:34:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Had he not admitted Shah at David Rockeller's (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            HoundDog, FindingMyVoice

            urging, his presidency likely would've been very different.  The hostage crisis dominated everything else from fall '79 until his term ended.  

            His presidency looked a lot worse at the time than it has looked in the context of what has followed.   There is something seriously wrong w/ the fact that Reagan is treated so much more kindly by history.  Then again, had Congressional Dems (who controlled both houses at time) not agreed w/ the Beltway consensus to let Iran/contra basically slide, Carter might have a better reputation than Reagan.*

            I cut my political teeth in Carter's '76 campaign.  I supported Ted K's primary challenge in '79-80.

            *Had the October Surprise theory been properly investigated, those reputations would've shifted, too.

            Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

            by RFK Lives on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 03:34:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  My understanding is that one reason impeachment (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RFK Lives, FindingMyVoice

              proceedings were not brought against Reagan was there was a widespread belief already at that time that he was not sufficiently cogent to know what Ollie North was doing in the the basement.

              That and exhaustion with the process with Nixon.

              Purely on the merits of the case, I believe he could have been impeached, and the effort to glorify him hence has been galling. Few wish to speak ill of the dead, or ailing, which is the only reason I can think of that we allowed a major airport to be named after him which is a travesty in my opinion.

              I do not remember where I read this but one famous story, is that Reagan was being prepared for a meeting that included his Secretary of State.  

              Some of the "underlings had been brought into the conference room in advance and one spied Reagan's prompt cards already placed where he would be sitting and read the top one which said something, like

              "Well, welcome eveyone, blah, blah and I know Secrertray of State  (will be sitting under the painting of Washington)
              "

              Reagan's que card had a note explaining to his that the guy sitting under the painting of George Washington was his Secretary of State! Cue Twilight Zone music.

              "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

              by HoundDog on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 03:53:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I find it telling that Democratic (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bobswern, jplanner, FindingMyVoice

        former presidents have had Presidential centers and libraries that focus on the continuing job of improving the world, like the Carter Center and Clintons Global Initiative while Republican former Presidents build pyramids like the pharaohs for their own self-glorification.

        Carter will be remembered as a great President and Reagan, despite the unending Republican attempts to turn him into a Saint, won't be.

        There already is class warfare in America. Unfortunately, the rich are winning.

        by Puddytat on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 02:08:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  mongering war is as American as American Pie (5+ / 0-)

    American Pie

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 09:30:58 AM PDT

  •  I never say this about politicians, but... (24+ / 0-)

    I love that man. He has a soul.

    "You are not even aware of what is possible. The extent of their capabilities is horrifying."Edward Snowden -6.62, -6.92

    by CanyonWren on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 09:52:55 AM PDT

  •  Love President Carter (11+ / 0-)

    and he hits the nail on the head.

    I may have been more specific about this, though

    That we revert to armed conflict almost at the drop of a hat — and quite often it’s not only desired by the leaders of our country, but it’s also supported by the people of America.
    He could have been more specific about this, though...

    It's usually the segment of Americans that perpetuate racism and other inequities (a majority of white men) in America that desire to go to war.

    Unfortunately, a  majority of them happen to be the ruling class.

    And they usually perpetuate the same inequities abroad too and they've always done (i.e. read George Orwell on the arrival of Jim Crow in some English establishments during the Second World War...and that's one of the more obscure examples).

  •  Thank you Bob! (11+ / 0-)

    Salon is now my first stop reading. I have come full circle since I started out my political reading with a membership there over 10 years ago. This year they hired Thomas Frank, my favourite political writer right now.

    Yes, Mr. Carter is right again.

    To thine ownself be true

    by Agathena on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 10:25:01 AM PDT

  •  But the antiwar movement is dead because the (8+ / 0-)

    American left can't figure out what is a war and what isn't.  Is Syria a war?  Is Libya a war?  Is Ukraine a war?  Is Afghanistan a "good" war"?  Our leaders unfortunately are smarter than us collectively while having massive propaganda tools and resources at their disposal.  And relative to the rest of the world "looking" at the U.S. and the number one Warmonger, the proof is all over the damn planet. The question remains, are the American people going to do anything about it?

    "Fragmented and confused, we have no plan to combat any of this, but are looking to be saved by the very architects of our ruination."

    by BigAlinWashSt on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 10:43:31 AM PDT

  •  Prison population, huge military budgets,... (14+ / 0-)

    ..., mass surveillance, torture, police militarization, warmongering, money in politics, it all goes hand in hand. It's a mindset and a framework that makes us unique in the world.

    We need to change.  The first step is to recognize we have a problem.  Most Americans have not connected the dots.  President Carter seems to be a leader, we need more leaders to make it a movement.  It will be a grassroots movement, it will not come from within the parties.

    Strangely enough it may require progressives and libertarians to work together.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 10:44:48 AM PDT

  •  Jimmy Carter could have done a lot to prevent (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, codairem

    this.  He could have gone after the criminals who infested the Nixon/Ford regimes, he could have published the true story of our incursions into Latin America, and detailed the abuses of the FBI in its decimation of activists.  Carter could have demanded Justice Department investigations into Kent State and Jackson State.  I like much of what he is saying now, but when he had power he was ineffective.  And, like Obama, Carter came into office with a wide mandate for change and sought to preserve the status quo with minor adjustments.

    75534 4-ever or until dk5

    by NearlyNormal on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:10:47 AM PDT

    •  Ask yourself WHY (4+ / 0-)
      He could have gone after the criminals who infested the Nixon/Ford regimes, he could have published the true story of our incursions into Latin America, and detailed the abuses of the FBI in its decimation of activists.  Carter could have demanded Justice Department investigations into Kent State and Jackson State.  
      I would venture a guess that at least some of the "things he's saying now" are rooted in ideals and values that he possessed long before he was President.

      So why would someone so scholarly, someone so infused with complete humanity and decency refrain from doing so many of the right things while he held the highest electoral office in the United States?

      I find it fascinating that so many have been asking the same question about the current President!

      And, like Obama, Carter came into office with a wide mandate for change and sought to preserve the status quo with minor adjustments.
      While I strongly disagree that everything Mr. Obama has done regarding "the status quo" has fallen under the category of "minor adjustment, I agree with your general sentiment overall. I highlight this statement to demonstrate..."Here we are again", with another Democratic President who came into office with "a wide mandate for change".

      Ask yourself WHY neither one of these men did more to vanquish or even acknowledge the craven lawlessness of their predecessors while they still had power?
       

      This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

      by lunachickie on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:53:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I ask myself and I think (0+ / 0-)

        there is something about the Presidency that makes modern Presidents not able to take the action they initially want to or say they will take before they take office. This thing makes Presidents not act completely as the humane and decent people they are, that we can see they are, at heart. I have my suspicions what it is about the modern Presidency that cuts the power of Democratic Presidents especially, to do good, but will leave it at that.

    •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)

      Carter only won the 1976 election with 297 votes. In fact, Ford carried more states and Carter restored, for a brief moment in time, the famed Solid South.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      The coalition that elected Jimmy Carter had little or no resemblance (other than portions of the Midwest) to the coalition that elected Obama twice.

      and I would maintain that Carter had a mandate for little or nothing that you state.

      •  Well, I remember and he did have a mandate (0+ / 0-)

        the country was disgusted with the war that had finally ended, the criminal behavior of the Nixon/Ford administration was in full view, and, even in the military where I was at the time, the general view was that there needed to be great change in the way the government operated.

        Of course it wasn't the same coalition, a generation of those voters are dead now, and the power of the unions and labor is not even a decent percentage of what it was then.  Carter had a strong mandate for change just like Obama did.  And, like in '09, the right was demoralized and weak and vulnerable.  One thing about the right, though, is that they have great interest and resources to protect those interests and they don't stay down long.  It may be another 30 years before we get the conditions where a leader could lead.  Hopefully, we won't have to go through another disastrous war and economic peril to get there.

        75534 4-ever or until dk5

        by NearlyNormal on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 07:50:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  No President Has Been Shortchanged As Much (12+ / 0-)

    The Republicans made this mans name synonymous with failure and the Democrats didn't help by shunning him. Shame on us for what we helped do. Carter deserves as many accolades as George W. Bush does not.

    And as the song and dance begins, the children play at home with needles, needles and pins.

    by The Lone Apple on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:11:19 AM PDT

  •  If this were true (0+ / 0-)

    then how come the US still rates highly in global opinion polls put out by Gallup and Pew?

    •  Ummm...please provide the DATES of those polls... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lunachickie, lostinamerica

      ...and links supporting your statement would be appropriate, too. (I'm assuming you're talking about polls in the 21st century, right?)

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:34:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is yesterday recent enough? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        NedSparks, TFinSF, codairem

        U.S. Tops Other Global Leaders in Approval

        In fairness, of course, this is Gallup, and I think we all eagerly await their newest poll on President Romney’s approval ratings.

        How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

        by BenderRodriguez on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 12:11:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is all Obama bump look before 2008... (0+ / 0-)

          and if you read the text he does very very well in Sub-Saharan Africa and not to belittle his overall popularity, but if I were African and saw a man of direct African decent leading the most powerful country in the world and I would have an extra liking for him too.

          Please don't take that wrong even though there is a real ring of possible racism in it. Its just true as it would be for people of Asia if we had our first Asian American President or for Jewish people with our First Jewish President, etc...

          Join the DeRevolution: We are not trying to take the country, we are trying to take the country back. Get the money out of politics with public financed campaigns so 'Of the People, By the People and For the People' rings true again.

          by fToRrEeEsSt on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:09:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  For this unskewing to make sense (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NedSparks, BenderRodriguez

            you'd have to also discount all polling from predominantly white countries for all prior US presidents. Probably better to not unskew in the first place if you want to compare apples to apples.

            ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

            by TFinSF on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 02:32:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well the truth is the person who linked... (0+ / 0-)

              it misrepresented it anyway since we were discussing America'a popularity and its a pol on 'leaders' popularity. There is nothing that says people can't like Obama and hate America so its a useless poll in the context that is being discussed.

              Also your logic doesn't make sense all US presidents till now were white any excitement over that ended in the 18th or 19th century. The closest other analogy would be Kennedy and the Irish Catholics and there is little doubt he was very popular among people of his same heritage.

              Join the DeRevolution: We are not trying to take the country, we are trying to take the country back. Get the money out of politics with public financed campaigns so 'Of the People, By the People and For the People' rings true again.

              by fToRrEeEsSt on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 02:41:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  So your going to stick with (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                NedSparks

                unskewing the poll of the black guy b/c you assume he's getting a bump from predominantly black countries, but don't bother wondering whether there might be a similar situation with white presidents getting an advantage in predominantly white countries.

                That's some fine reasoning there.

                all US presidents till now were white any excitement over that ended in the 18th or 19th century
                Racism against black and brown people persists however. White presidents benefit from not having to deal with that. I can't dumb it down for you any more than I already have.

                ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

                by TFinSF on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 05:10:06 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No I am going to stick with its irrelevant... (0+ / 0-)

                  No matter how much you might want it to be.

                  Join the DeRevolution: We are not trying to take the country, we are trying to take the country back. Get the money out of politics with public financed campaigns so 'Of the People, By the People and For the People' rings true again.

                  by fToRrEeEsSt on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 05:11:54 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  The unskewing is irrelevant? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    NedSparks

                    Then why did you propose it as a necessary measure to understand the poll results that BenderRodriguez posted? This discussion would be more fruitful if you could keep track of your own argument.

                    ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

                    by TFinSF on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 05:16:29 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You have reading comprehension issues... (0+ / 0-)

                      The discussion is on how people see America and the poll is on how people see America's leader.

                      Two different questions and two different answers. I am not sure what your problem is.

                      Join the DeRevolution: We are not trying to take the country, we are trying to take the country back. Get the money out of politics with public financed campaigns so 'Of the People, By the People and For the People' rings true again.

                      by fToRrEeEsSt on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 05:24:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Nope, it was still you who posted this: (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        NedSparks
                        That is all Obama bump look before 2008... (0+ / 0-)
                        and if you read the text he does very very well in Sub-Saharan Africa and not to belittle his overall popularity, but if I were African and saw a man of direct African decent leading the most powerful country in the world and I would have an extra liking for him too.

                        Please don't take that wrong even though there is a real ring of possible racism in it. Its just true as it would be for people of Asia if we had our first Asian American President or for Jewish people with our First Jewish President, etc...

                        My reading comprehension is fine, but I'll take your projection as an admission of defeat.

                        ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

                        by TFinSF on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 05:28:20 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  Apologies if this posts twice... (0+ / 0-)

                    scoop gave me an error the first time.

                    But, basically, I don't want anything to be relevant or irrelevant. Remember, it was you (not me) that proposed unskewing as a remedy to some perceived flaw in a poll. I didn't bring it up. You did. I wouldn't have commented at all if you didn't propose unskewing a poll in a manner that specifically would work against Obama because he is black. It's not only methodologically unsound, it's pretty ugly.

                    ....no longer in SF.... -9.00, -7.38

                    by TFinSF on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 05:21:46 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

        •  This is underwhelming... n/t (0+ / 0-)

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 02:27:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Here's the Pew poll (0+ / 0-)

        The Gallup poll was linked below

        These results are from July 2013

        http://www.pewglobal.org/...

        •  Israel scores higher than U.S. in this poll... (0+ / 0-)

          ....and highest overall, and Ghana and Senegal are scored as high as the U.S. in this poll, too.

          (So, I'm wondering what this really means?)

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 03:30:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Red herring. n/t (0+ / 0-)

      Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

      by democracy inaction on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 12:25:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Best...ex...president...ever (9+ / 0-)

    And one of humanity's greatest living moral voices. Really, turn his comments over and over in your mind: this is an ex-PRESIDENT, not some random pundit, ideologue or outsider. For his comments to be stated and then largely ignored or devalued by the mass of the U.S. media and population is astounding.

    The big American response..."whatever."

    I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires. - Susan B. Anthony

    by pajoly on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 11:44:00 AM PDT

  •  I am not sure he was our best President ever... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nebraska68847Dem, bobswern, Shockwave

    But I am absolutely certain he is our best Ex-President ever by many magnitudes.

    Join the DeRevolution: We are not trying to take the country, we are trying to take the country back. Get the money out of politics with public financed campaigns so 'Of the People, By the People and For the People' rings true again.

    by fToRrEeEsSt on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:01:33 PM PDT

    •  The time-frame (4+ / 0-)

      when Carter was President was a tough economic time.

      Nixon had "frozen" prices and wages in an artificial move to stop inflation and America was coming out of a war which floods the job market and carries a huge debt.

      We didn't learn then... stay out of wars; they cost money we don't have to waste.

      Suddenly, it dawns on me, Earnest T. Bass is the intellectual and philosophical inspiration of the TeaParty.

      by Nebraska68847Dem on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:59:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Let's examine our list of extant ex-Presidents. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    deha, bobswern, FindingMyVoice

    Some of their more notable accomplishments...

    39 - Carter, James Earl "Jimmy"

    Taught at University Georgia.

    2002 Nobel peace prize.

    Carter Center for human rights.

    Hands on leadership with Habitat for Humanity.

    Author of more than 20 books.

    41 - Bush, George H. W.
    Awarded a knighthood by Queen Elizabeth II.

    Chairman to the Board of Trustees for Eisenhower Fellowships.

    Honorary Chairman of Points of Light.

    Received the Ronald Reagan Freedom Award.

    Worked with #42 for numerous hurricane and tsunami relief efforts.

    Awarded the Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama.

    Currently oldest living ex-President.

    42 - Clinton, William J. "Bill"
    Active party figure.

    Clinton Foundation for prevention of AIDS and global warming.

    Haiti Special Envoy and co founder of the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund.

    Published autobiography and several other books.

    Globally active behind the scenes.

    43 - Bush, George W.
    Received the Latvian Order of the Three Stars, 2005.

    Released his memoirs 2010.

    Worked with #42 on the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund.

    Read a letter at ground zero, that President Abraham Lincoln wrote to a widow who lost five sons during the Civil War.

    Paints.

    Looks to me that 'W' is last on that list and only the 'Big Dog' comes close to President Carter. HW comes across looking like the son of privilege that he is.
    •  If you breakout the many accomplishments... (4+ / 0-)

      ...of the work of the Carter Center, you'll find that President Carter truly does dwarf virtually every president in our country's history, exponentially, in terms of what he's accomplished since he left office.

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 02:31:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, he certainly does, and (0+ / 0-)

        I have been saying for years, as a loyal Democrat and as someone that appreciates truly heroic effort, that President Carter will go down in long term history as one of the very best Presidents we have ever had.

        His term in office was short, and we, the populace, did not have social media to help him in his re-election effort. Just think how different the world would be , if that modest peanut farmer from Georgia had won a second term.

        Just his work on Habitat tells me volumes about where his priorities lie.

      •  Also check out The Elders-Mandela was on it (0+ / 0-)

        with him. Former leaders working to help humanity

        theelders.org

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site