Carter: Bush's impact 'worst in history'

[vinnie]

Carter says remarks on Bush 'careless' By DON SCHANCHE JR., Associated Press Writer


ATLANTA - Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday his remarks were "careless or misinterpreted" when he said the Bush administration has been the "worst in history" for its impact around the world.


Speaking on NBC's "Today," Carter appeared to retreat from a statement he made to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette for a Saturday story in which he said: "I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history."

Carter said Monday that when he made the comment, he was responding to a question comparing the Bush administration's foreign policy to that of Richard Nixon.

"And I think Richard Nixon had a very good and productive foreign policy and my remarks were maybe careless or misinterpreted. But I wasn't comparing the overall administration and I was certainly not talking personally about any president," Carter said.

He added: "I think this administration's foreign policy compared to president Nixon's was much worse," Carter said. But he said he did not mean to call it the worst in history.

"No, that's not what I wanted to say. I wasn't comparing this administration with other administrations back through history but just with President Nixon."

Deputy White House press secretary Tony Fratto, with Bush at the president's ranch in Crawford, Texas, said Monday: "I think it just highlights the importance of being careful in choosing your words. I'll just leave it at that."

In audio posted Saturday on the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette's Web site, an interviewer asked Carter "which president was worse, George W. Bush or Richard Nixon?" In his response, Carter gave the broader answer, calling the Bush administration "the worst in history."

On Sunday, the White House dismissed Carter, the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winner, as "increasingly irrelevant" after his harsh criticism.

In response, Carter said: "Well, I don't claim to have any relevancy. I have a completely unofficial capacity. The only thing I lead is the Carter Center."

After the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette story appeared, Carter spokeswoman Deanna Congileo had confirmed his comments to The Associated Press.

"The overt reversal of America's basic values as expressed by previous administrations, including those of George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon and others, has been the most disturbing to me," the newspaper quoted Carter as saying.

In his comments Monday, Carter said he has not been timid about sharing his opinions directly with the president and other world leaders, but said he has been careful not to level personal criticism against Bush.

 

[gardenweasel]

I was a tad young when the hostage situation took place but did Iran grab our hostages because they hated us for our freedom or were we sticking our nose once again in somebodies business? Maybe i can contact Ron Paul to get a truthful answer on this one. DTB i know Fox was not around back then but do you know what there spin might have been?

gee, and he was so popular when he was president.

/ smirk.....

carter`s upset because blair was bush`s lapdog?......

nice...very nice...an ex-head of state pissing on the leaders of other countries (especially your main ally).....for god`s sake,have a bit of respect for your past position as president.....

and no one mentioned on here that jimmy was the ayatollah kkomeini`s lapdog,either......surprise...

and i always hear about bush and the saudis.......nobody`s sucked more saudi dick than carter....nobody....





the president of double digit inflation, interest rates, and unemployment, mr. malaise himself, calling someone the worst in history?...now that`s funny.....

you think gas prices are bad now?...many of you yuppies don`t even remember gas lines..thank you, jimmy....

but he has his positive(singular)...he`s almost single-handedly responsible for republicans cleaning dems` clocks in presidential elections of late(5 of the last 7).....it took dems 12 years to reelect a pres. after this train wreck...


oh,and spongy....i failed to mention that they grabbed the hostages `cause carter stabbed the shah in the back and was the main impetus for the shah`s overthrow....the reason why iran reverted back to an islamist state...and the enabling of the mullahs to take power by withdrawing american support...


the carter credo....."if a country works against america, it proves how wrong WE are."

"if a country works WITH america, it proves that country is being coerced or is just a lap dog doing its master's bidding."


and i didn`t even mention leisure suits...

 

[AR182]

whoever thinks that jimmy carter was anything but a poor president both domestically & internationally should go back & check the record. however it doesn't take away the incompetent way the war in riaq is being handled.


Battle of the Presidents: Jimmy Carter, George Bush

Written by: Jeff Crouere


Usually, ex-Presidents are respectful when commenting on the current occupant of the White House. The reason is that they are uniquely suited to know the demands of the job and the incredible pressure that the President faces. There is an unwritten code of honor among men who have served as leader of the Free World.



However, such tradition did not stop Jimmy Carter, the nation?s 39th President, from blasting George W. Bush, the 43rd President this weekend. In a newspaper interview, Carter claimed that ?as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history.?



Carter cited ?an overt reversal of America?s basic values? and said the Bush administration is pursuing foreign policies that are contrary to the record of previous Presidents Nixon, George H.W. Bush, and Reagan.



The Bush White House did not hold back and called Carter ?increasingly irrelevant.? At the Crawford ranch on Sunday, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said ?I think it?s sad that President Carter?s reckless personal criticism is out there.?



It does not help America?s relations with foreign nations or our effort in the war on terrorism to have the former President of the United States denounce the Commander-in-Chief. It shows that the country is not united in our war effort and gives aid and comfort to our enemy. While President George W. Bush has a mixed record at best in foreign policy and has made many mistakes in our current campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, it still seems somewhat unseemly for Carter to launch such a vitriolic attack.



Ever since his one term in office, Carter has been trying to boost his standing among historians and the American public. He has certainly been involved in some good activities, such as Habitat for Humanity, but his diplomatic adventures overseas have usually ended in failure, such as his debacle in North Korea.



While he was President, Carter allowed the Soviet Union to advance around the globe; our American hostages to be taken in Iran and held for over 400 days. During his four years at the helm, our military declined significantly and morale was poor both in the armed forces and throughout the country. In the Carter years, our economy was in shambles with the misery index of a high inflation rate and a high unemployment rate making economy conditions miserable. Interest rates were out of control, taxes were high, and Americans were facing soaring prices and a lack of real buying power.



Carter left all of this mess to Ronald Reagan, who, fortunately, was able to turn around the economy, the military, our standing in the world and the mood of the American people. History should always view Jimmy Carter as one of the worst U.S. Presidents of all-time, not based on opinion, but on his lousy record.



He can criticize the current President all he wants, but it will never change how history rates his totally unsuccessful presidency.

 

[The Sponge]

gee, and he was so popular when he was president.

...






you think gas prices are bad now?...many of you yuppies don`t even remember gas lines..thank you, jimmy....


oh,and spongy....i failed to mention that they grabbed the hostages `cause carter stabbed the shah in the back and was the main impetus for the shah`s overthrow....the reason why iran reverted back to an islamist state...and the enabling of the mullahs to take power by withdrawing american support...


...

So your saying they didn't mind our freedom weasal? On another note i know the guy wasn't a good president but to compare him to this abortion now is crazy. By the way why were the gas prices his fault back then but not Bushes right now? Interest rates? You really think that was his fault? Money interest controls this country and if they don't like a guy they do something about it.
I remember paying 79 cents a gallon under Clinton but i wonder was this because he sold us out and let these pricks merge so he could look good? Leave Jimmy alone. Peanuts were very cheap back then and now look at them.

 

[gardenweasel]

whoever thinks that jimmy carter was nothing but a poor president both domestically & internationally should go back & check the record. however it doesn't take away the incompetent way the war in riaq is being handled./QUOTE]

i can`t disagree with that statement,my man....and this border bill,along with the attempted ports deal are cementing bush`s legacy in my mind.....

now,if only the dems would just abandon this defeatist rhetoric until the general that THEY elected has a chance to see HIS plan succeed or fail on it`s own merits...

give it to the end of the year and then,if theres no progress,withhold funding.....stop it ...end it...

then we can redeploy to "okinawa"(i can`t believe murtha really siad that)....

but seriously...give the military their last shot...without political impediment...

if the dems were smart....somehow try and indicate to the president...privately if possible(actually essential)...that you have until the end of the year to stabilize the probelm areas in iraq....give him what he needs....but make it clear,that after dec 31st,all bets are off and that the dems will do everything in their power to end it...no holds barred...

i don`t believe petraues is an ideologue...he`s the one that said,"military strength alone will not win this conflict"(i`m paraphrasing).....

but,what reid and murtha are doing now is purely political....and you have to surmise that they`re invested in our defeat...

any sane person knows that the country and it`s future security and economic interests trump political advantage....

that`s pretty simple...

give the military what they need...change r.o.e.....let them clean out the cesspools like sadre city......shut the hell up until january...

then if things are still untenable,cut the funding...make your case to the public...take off the political gloves....

we owe ourselves...the iraqis...the region...one last effort...

then,if it`s a no go,.....i really don`t know:shrug: ....the thought of iran having control in the region...with nukes...al qaeda with it`s foot in the door in iraq,afghanistan,indonesia,africa,europe....

we live in interesting(and dangerous) times....

i don`t know...

 

[AR182]

whoever thinks that jimmy carter was nothing but a poor president both domestically & internationally should go back & check the record. however it doesn't take away the incompetent way the war in riaq is being handled./QUOTE]

i can`t disagree with that statement,my man....and this border bill,along with the attempted ports deal are cementing bush`s legacy in my mind.....

now,if only the dems would just abandon this defeatist rhetoric until the general that THEY elected has a chance to see HIS plan succeed or fail on it`s own merits...

give it to the end of the year and then,if theres no progress,withhold funding.....stop it ...end it...

then we can redeploy to "okinawa"(i can`t believe murtha really siad that)....

but seriously...give the military their last shot...without political impediment...

if the dems were smart....somehow try and indicate to the president...privately if possible(actually essential)...that you have until the end of the year to stabilize the probelm areas in iraq....give him what he needs....but make it clear,that after dec 31st,all bets are off and that the dems will do everything in their power to end it...no holds barred...

i don`t believe petraues is an ideologue...he`s the one that said,"military strength alone will not win this conflict"(i`m paraphrasing).....

but,what reid and murtha are doing now is purely political....and you have to surmise that they`re invested in our defeat...

any sane person knows that the country and it`s future security and economic interests trump political advantage....

that`s pretty simple...

give the military what they need...change r.o.e.....let them clean out the cesspools like sadre city......shut the hell up until january...

then if things are still untenable,cut the funding...make your case to the public...take off the political gloves....

we owe ourselves...the iraqis...the region...one last effort...

then,if it`s a no go,.....i really don`t know:shrug: ....the thought of iran having control in the region...with nukes...al qaeda with it`s foot in the door in iraq,afghanistan,indonesia,africa,europe....

we live in interesting(and dangerous) times....

i don`t know...

gw...

i tend to agree with you.

 

[The Sponge]

Not sure what anyone could have done with that hostage crisis. To think the Iranians hid them all in the same place is foolish. I know the neocons wanted us to just make an example even tho all the hostages would get killed. Of course they were not one of the hostages. If i was one i would rather take my 400 days of beatings and live to play another day. Back then, before we got caught torturing people, im not even sure these people got beaten for 400 days. To me these neocons make life seem so simple. Sacrifice this bunch to get to a goal. Like this surge. I heard a general say we are gonna have some casualties no doubt but we have to do it. Like these kids lives are worth the mission. I don't know about anyone else but i havent seen anyone comeback from the dead. I think the road stops here and dying at 19 isn't my cup of tea. Again if you like it or not 400 hostages got to play another day. Close to 4 thousand soldiers will never see what they could have become in life because it is over. Completely over.