Author Topic: Article from Star Parker  (Read 1486 times)

Colossus_500

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3993
  • Psalm 139
Article from Star Parker
« on: January 15, 2008, 10:03:31 AM »
How Republicans can help elect a Democrat
By Star Parker
Monday, January 14, 2008

The opportunity for Republicans to hold onto the presidency in 2008 is far better than what conventional punditry would have us believe. But for Republicans to capture this opportunity, they are going to have to stop the destructiveness that has been fomenting inside the party and the mudslinging against their own.

As I wrote in a recent column, year-end highlights from the Pew Research Center show the Republican Party in a state that can be seen as either a glass half empty or half full.

On the half empty part, Pew reports that now "fully half (50 percent) of Americans identified with or leaned toward the Democratic Party, compared with just 36 percent who affiliated with the Republican Party."

But the glass half full message is that this reflects disillusionment of Republicans and previous Republican-leaning Independents and not new enthusiasm for Democrats. Favorability ratings for the Democratic Party have been unchanged while it has gained this apparent new support.

I do not believe for a minute that the majority of Americans are anxious to turn this country over to the big government socialism and cultural nihilism of the Democratic Party. But they will just to get change, if Americans of all walks of life do not again feel, as they did under Ronald Reagan's leadership, that the Republican Party represents them.

The growth in government during this recent period in which Republicans have been in control is obscene. It is appalling that since 2000 the number of registered lobbyists in Washington has doubled, from about 17,000 to now over 34,000.

The leading Republican candidates at this point are McCain, Huckabee, and Romney. None are cookie cutter cutouts of the Reagan ideal.

But from a gamut of well-known conservative and Republican personalities, no one is being excoriated like Huckabee.

There may be dissatisfaction with the other candidates, but Huckabee is the only one publicly being charged with John Edwards-like populism, anti-capitalism, of not being a conservative and, from some, being outright called a liberal.

I even heard one talk show journalist say the other day that there are Republicans that have their "knives" out for Huckabee.

But, as of this writing, Huckabee has finished first in the Iowa caucuses, is polling strongly in a wide array of states, and is first in the latest Gallup national poll. This support is coming from voters who identify themselves as conservative.

I would suggest that the hate campaign being conducted against Huckabee, emanating from some whom I know and respect, is just one more symptom of Republicans losing touch with their own principles and base.

To bring one representative example, in a recent column former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey accuses Huckabee of "small minded populism" and "pitting his socially conservative supporters against the GOP's business wing."

But, this "business wing", as in corporations, is far from being a battering ram pushing free market and conservative principles.

In this election cycle, more corporate political contributions are going to Democrats and there is a long list of Wall Street moguls financing Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.

A study done by the Capital Research Center a couple years ago showed that the total corporate contributions to left-leaning organizations was fifteen times greater than to right-leaning organizations.

My own work over the years trying to get the conservative message into the black community has been made infinitely more difficult as a result of the multiple millions that America's corporations have poured into left-wing black organizations like the NAACP.

Ironically, Huckabee is the only Republican candidate to propose fundamental reform of our tax system. Credible economists, including one Nobel Prize winner, support the Fair Tax idea that Huckabee has put forth. Critics charging that the Fair Tax is politically impossible to enact also speak to the unfortunate state of mind of many Republicans today who can no longer conceive of major and sweeping change as achievable.

Inside-the-beltway Republicans have also lost touch with the increasing seriousness with which grass roots conservatives relate to the traditional values agenda. More and more folks are feeling personally assaulted by the meaninglessness that is gripping our culture and do not see our moral health as separate and apart from our economic health.

Rather than attacking Huckabee, folks would be better served to take a more careful and less dismissive look at why he's garnering such broad support.

If we lose focus on who really is a liberal, we'll really wind up with one in the White House.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2008, 12:50:00 PM »
Quote
I do not believe for a minute that the majority of Americans are anxious to turn this country over to the big government socialism and cultural nihilism of the Democratic Party. But they will just to get change, if Americans of all walks of life do not again feel, as they did under Ronald Reagan's leadership, that the Republican Party represents them.

Cultural Nihilism?  Who the hell is Star Parker?  Our culture is determined by the free marketplace of economics and ideas.  Why was 'Will & Grace' a hit tv show?  People tuned in.  Same for 'Friends' or 'Survivor' or any other crap show that's a national hit.  Same for music and same for fashion.

Lets follow the leadership of Ronald Reagan.  Here are some highlights:

*He signed tax increases 7 out of his 8 years in office

*He signed the largest tax increase in history

*He couldn't recall authorizing trading weapons with our enemies in Iran and funding Nicaraguan deathsquads with the sale proceeds.  That's Treason folks.

*His borrow and spend policies while irresponsibly cutting taxes plunged the country into debt that we are still trying to pay down

*The Grenada invasion...precursor to the current foreign war.  Thank god he invaded Grenada

*241 dead marines due to a suicide bomber in Lebanon...after his people denied the Pentagon's request to move the soldier's out of the Lebanon base to avoid such an event.  (Reagan thought that looked cowardly)



Now that's real conservative leadership! 

We certainly don't want a liberal!

Colossus_500

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3993
  • Psalm 139
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2008, 01:46:47 PM »
Cultural Nihilism?  Who the hell is Star Parker?  Our culture is determined by the free marketplace of economics and ideas.  Why was 'Will & Grace' a hit tv show?  People tuned in.  Same for 'Friends' or 'Survivor' or any other crap show that's a national hit.  Same for music and same for fashion.

Lets follow the leadership of Ronald Reagan.  Here are some highlights:

*He signed tax increases 7 out of his 8 years in office

*He signed the largest tax increase in history

*He couldn't recall authorizing trading weapons with our enemies in Iran and funding Nicaraguan deathsquads with the sale proceeds.  That's Treason folks.

*His borrow and spend policies while irresponsibly cutting taxes plunged the country into debt that we are still trying to pay down

*The Grenada invasion...precursor to the current foreign war.  Thank god he invaded Grenada

*241 dead marines due to a suicide bomber in Lebanon...after his people denied the Pentagon's request to move the soldier's out of the Lebanon base to avoid such an event.  (Reagan thought that looked cowardly)



Now that's real conservative leadership! 

We certainly don't want a liberal!
Good to see ya, Deck.  I haven't been on in a while. 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2008, 02:02:43 PM »
Good to see ya, Deck.  I haven't been on in a while. 
Good to see you as well my friend.  Did you have a good holiday?  I did.  My wife got me a giant mug.  I've been with this woman for 20 years and every year I asked for a giant mug for Christmas.  This year, she delivered.

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2008, 07:39:25 PM »
I don't understand - wasn't Reagan a crap president - I've never heard anything good said about him in Oz.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2008, 11:56:47 PM »
I don't understand - wasn't Reagan a crap president - I've never heard anything good said about him in Oz.

He's possibly the most overrated politician ever, and could possibly be considered for impeachment.

He supported terrorists in Beirut.

After a bomb of a disco in GERMANY, he ordered a flight attack on Libya. Like, WTF?

He supported terrorists in South America.

He supported Saddam Hussein.

He supported the Talibans.

During his era, the ghettos and the poverty grew in USA, and the ghetto related criminality followed.

Ronald Reagan was a very good communicator, good at the rhetorics. But when it comes to his political legacy, there is plenty that should be questioned.


I will give him credit for one thing, and that is no small feat.

Reagan, probably without knowing it himself, took down Soviet Union, through the weapon race of the 80's. Finally the Soviet Union faced bankrupcy, due to Reagan's aggressive military upscaling.

So ironically, Reagan was a peacemaker.

Without Reagan, the Warzaw Pact would've held for another 5-10 years probably.
As empty as paradise

Colossus_500

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3993
  • Psalm 139
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2008, 06:03:25 AM »
Good to see you as well my friend.  Did you have a good holiday?  I did.  My wife got me a giant mug.  I've been with this woman for 20 years and every year I asked for a giant mug for Christmas.  This year, she delivered.
Yep.  We had a great celebration as well.  Stayed home and got to enjoy the kids play with all the gifts that Santa brought them. 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2008, 06:52:38 AM »
...
I will give him credit for one thing, and that is no small feat.

Reagan, probably without knowing it himself, took down Soviet Union, through the weapon race of the 80's. Finally the Soviet Union faced bankrupcy, due to Reagan's aggressive military upscaling.

So ironically, Reagan was a peacemaker.

Without Reagan, the Warzaw Pact would've held for another 5-10 years probably.
The US policy for taking down the Soviet Union through escalation of arms and cold war tactics started in 1946 or so.  The policy came to fruition under Reagan.  Was the Soviet's economic downfall due entirely to that longstanding US policy?  I don't think it was quite that simple.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2008, 07:01:37 AM »
He's possibly the most overrated politician ever, and could possibly be considered for impeachment.

He supported terrorists in Beirut.

After a bomb of a disco in GERMANY, he ordered a flight attack on Libya. Like, WTF?

He supported terrorists in South America...Against Cuban and Soviet adventurism in that sphere

He supported Saddam Hussein...Against Iran, a country carter let slide toward Islamic fundementalism

He supported the Talibans.There was no Taliban...none...the Mujih's were fighting the Sov's, thus an ally of convienance

During his era, the ghettos and the poverty grew in USA, and the ghetto related criminality followed.Ur kidding me right

Ronald Reagan was a very good communicator, good at the rhetorics. But when it comes to his political legacy, there is plenty that should be questioned.


I will give him credit for one thing, and that is no small feat.

Reagan, probably without knowing it himself, took down Soviet Union, through the weapon race of the 80's. Finally the Soviet Union faced bankrupcy, due to Reagan's aggressive military upscaling.

So ironically, Reagan was a peacemaker.

Without Reagan, the Warzaw Pact would've held for another 5-10 years probably.


He crushed the Sov and finished the Cold War..he set up the country for the prosperity of the 90's. He did what he was elected to do. he had to unscrew all the mistakes of Jimmy Carter. Reagan was one of our best presidents.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2008, 10:10:40 AM »

He crushed the Sov and finished the Cold War..he set up the country for the prosperity of the 90's. He did what he was elected to do. he had to unscrew all the mistakes of Jimmy Carter. Reagan was one of our best presidents.
Carter actually began deregulating during his term: in 1978, he deregulated airlines; by 1980, he was deregulating trucking, railroads interest rates and oil. All are fundamental to the economy's operations. Carter also set up the deregulatory machinery that Reagan would later use to slash regulations almost in half by the end of his second term.

Reagan slashed federal regulations like a mad-man but it had no real effect on worker producitivity. 

Did he crush the Soviets by asking Gorbachev to tear down that wall?

What mistakes of Carter did Reagan rectify?  (besides the October Surprise of the coincidental release of hostages upon the day Reagan assumed power)

How did Reagan set up the prosperity of the 90s? 

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #10 on: January 16, 2008, 01:51:36 PM »
Carter was and is the worst president we've ever had. He let Iran go..he sold out South America to the Leftists.

Stagflation (inflation and unemployment) got much worse under him.
Started the whole "green belt strategy" thought that by empowering and radicalizing muslims, they would drive out the soviets and would be closer to the US. Yeah brilliant. The man that helped start this whole mess.
The non response to the us embassy takeover in iran showed the US to be a paper tiger and that they can attack the US with impunity.
Giving North Korea a nuclear reactor in the 1994 peace accords. Even after he wasn't president, he continued to make major mistakes.


This sums it up nicely...

While Carter's administration brought the U.S. some of its worst economic conditions in living memory - with soaring interest and inflation rates - his worst failing as President was in the realm of foreign policy.  His human rights policy led to human rights disasters in Nicaragua and Iran, where he facilitated the rise to power of Marxists and Islamist despots, respectively. Both of those new tyrannies far surpassed the brutality of their predecessors. The fruits of the Iran disaster are still very much with the United States today. If the U.S. would have supported the Shah or his successors, the history of the past 25 years in the Middle East would have been very different, and the Iranian people would have fared much better. Moreover, the Soviet Union would have hesitated greatly over invading Afghanistan in 1979. Carter's timid approach to international conflicts emboldened the USSR to extend its reach further into the Third World. By letting the Soviets know he would not respond if they invaded Afghanistan, Carter spawned a war that ultimately saw one million dead Afghans, five million displaced, and a situation of evil that nurtured the Islamic hatred and militancy that ultimately turned on the West and brought about 9/11.

L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2008, 02:46:27 PM »

Quote
Carter was and is the worst president we've ever had. He let Iran go..he sold out South America to the Leftists.
And Ronald Reagan supported rightwing deathsquads.  At the arrangement of Reagan underlings Elliot Abrams, John Negroponte, and Otto Reich, the US supported terrorists and terrorism in South America and Central America.

Quote
Stagflation (inflation and unemployment) got much worse under him.
That was due to the economic cycle and to a lesser degree, Paul Volcker--the Chrmn of the Fed and not Carter.  Carter was the president during an inflationary peak (part of the economic cycle)  Volcker tightened the money supply and let interest rates blow up to almost 20% to create a steep recession before slashing those rates to compel a recovery.  Which happened of course.

Or we could buy the bullshit line that Reagan's tax cuts jump started the economy and indeed, caused the great economic expansion under Clinton.  That's funny.
Quote
Started the whole "green belt strategy" thought that by empowering and radicalizing muslims, they would drive out the soviets and would be closer to the US. Yeah brilliant. The man that helped start this whole mess.
I don't know what you are referring to here.
Quote
The non response to the us embassy takeover in iran showed the US to be a paper tiger and that they can attack the US with impunity.
Carter implemented a couple of rescue attempts.  They failed but he tried.  Wasn't it amazing how just the mere election of Reagan caused the Iranians to turn over the hostages?

You know those Iranians, the same ones that Reagan armed to the teeth with stinger missiles?

Quote
Giving North Korea a nuclear reactor in the 1994 peace accords. Even after he wasn't president, he continued to make major mistakes.
He didn't give N. Korea a reactor.
Quote
This sums it up nicely...

While Carter's administration brought the U.S. some of its worst economic conditions in living memory - with soaring interest and inflation rates - his worst failing as President was in the realm of foreign policy.  His human rights policy led to human rights disasters in Nicaragua and Iran, where he facilitated the rise to power of Marxists and Islamist despots, respectively. Both of those new tyrannies far surpassed the brutality of their predecessors. The fruits of the Iran disaster are still very much with the United States today. If the U.S. would have supported the Shah or his successors, the history of the past 25 years in the Middle East would have been very different, and the Iranian people would have fared much better. Moreover, the Soviet Union would have hesitated greatly over invading Afghanistan in 1979. Carter's timid approach to international conflicts emboldened the USSR to extend its reach further into the Third World. By letting the Soviets know he would not respond if they invaded Afghanistan, Carter spawned a war that ultimately saw one million dead Afghans, five million displaced, and a situation of evil that nurtured the Islamic hatred and militancy that ultimately turned on the West and brought about 9/11.
His Human Rights policy stands in stark contrast to Reagan's support of cold blooded killers in S. America and C. America.  The Deathsquads were tools of the economic elite that savagely murdered and raped all the peasants that did not play ball with the interests of the elites.  Remember,  Ronald Reagan never met a millionaire he didn't like...even if he/she was a fucking butcher.

Speaking of deathsquads let's talk about the Shah of Iran--the puppet installed by the US--the rapist and destroyer of his 'own people'.  Are you starting to see why Iran hates us?

Who won the Afghan war again?  The Soviets?  I don't think so.  That summation statement that Carter's non-interference in the Afghan war somehow brought us the attacks of 9/11 is beyond the pale of reasoned thought.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #12 on: January 16, 2008, 03:26:59 PM »
Back the Shah.....No Soviet invasion....no need to fund the Mujhi's...No deathsquads...Soviet/Cuban influence in our hemisphere..pick ur poison. We will not agree on this. I'm Right ur Left. Carter is a liberal darling. Lets just agree to disagree.
L

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #13 on: January 16, 2008, 08:13:52 PM »
Carter actually began deregulating during his term: in 1978, he deregulated airlines; by 1980, he was deregulating trucking, railroads interest rates and oil. All are fundamental to the economy's operations. Carter also set up the deregulatory machinery that Reagan would later use to slash regulations almost in half by the end of his second term.

Reagan slashed federal regulations like a mad-man but it had no real effect on worker producitivity. 

Did he crush the Soviets by asking Gorbachev to tear down that wall?

What mistakes of Carter did Reagan rectify?  (besides the October Surprise of the coincidental release of hostages upon the day Reagan assumed power)

How did Reagan set up the prosperity of the 90s? 

I saw a doco on the October Surprise - the US actually delayed the release of the hostages so that it would coincide with Reagan assuming power.

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #14 on: January 16, 2008, 08:29:20 PM »

He crushed the Sov and finished the Cold War..he set up the country for the prosperity of the 90's. He did what he was elected to do. he had to unscrew all the mistakes of Jimmy Carter. Reagan was one of our best presidents.

I think the US could have safely ignored most of these "threats" - most were not a direct threat to the US and would never have become so.

As for the soviet union - it was going to collapse eventually one way or the other.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2008, 07:30:34 AM »
Back the Shah.....No Soviet invasion....no need to fund the Mujhi's...No deathsquads...Soviet/Cuban influence in our hemisphere..pick ur poison. We will not agree on this. I'm Right ur Left. Carter is a liberal darling. Lets just agree to disagree.
Carter was not a liberal darling.  The guy put in place many of the anti-union and deregulation policies that Reagan accelerated.

As for your summary, yeah, we disagree.  Maybe we'll flesh that out in another thread.

Eldon

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 724
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2008, 07:46:58 AM »
When Jimmy Carter lost the 1980 election the Soviets were on the march, Communists had bases in Latin America, Americans were paying $1.40 for a gallon of gas (about $3.50 when adjusted for inflation), inflation was running at 15% APR, the prime rate was near 19% APR, the US Auto industry was dying, and modern radical Islamic terrorists had been born.

Jimmy was busy in his four years in office.

It's just so hard to tell people how bad Carter was. Carter had no grasp of the Federal reserve system. So he told Paul Volcher to pursue a lose monitary policy, and the US financial system almost went insolvent. The only thing that saved the US and international financial system in 1979 was when the West German Deutsche Bank bought up billions of dollars in US currency. The danger was when the dollar would hit less than 1.30 Marks per Dollar. It was that close. If a great depression had hit in 1979 then it would not have passed until 1990 or later.

Jimmy Carter didn't like the fact the oil companies were making money. So, he had a windfall oil profits tax on them. This little tax ignored basic economics, reduce the profitability on a product and you reduce its supply.

Carter was a beautiful busybody. He pretty much cut the Shaw of Iran out of US help and support. By late 1979 the Shaw was out of power and our people were being held hostage in Iran.

The hostage deal defines the word debacle. The truth of the matter was the USA could not even fly 8 helicopters into Iran. Carter had reduced the maintenance funding of the military. By 1980 the US military was reduced to pulling screws out of Jet "A" to keep Jet "B" flying.

When Candidate Reagan said Carter had a poor defense record then Carter defended his record by announcing that the US was building a Stealth jet bomber, at that time it was thought to be the F-19 but later turned out to be the F-117. The F-117 was only in proto-type form. However, to defend his record Carter leaked to the press that such a jet was being built.

Carter appointed Cyrus Vance to be the secretary of state. Vance, unable to get our hostages out of Iran's clutches, quit when the US tried to save our hostages with military force.

Carter met with the leaders of Israel and Egypt. However, the newly made radical Islamic forces killed the leader of Egypt by 1981. Carter helped give power to the leader of Panama. The result is the nation had to be invaded in 1989 because the leader had set up a narco-terrorist network.

Carter is the gift that keeps on giving. He can always be counted on to keep on undercutting US policy, giving aid and confort to the enemy.

Bill Clinton was not a perfect president. However, the economy and stock market did well. Richard Nixon made a lot of enemies. But he did get normal relations with China and put the seeds of peace in the middle east.

Jimmy Carter will go down as the worst president in the 20th Century. The radical Islamic terrorists who caused 9-11 have their roots in the failed foreign policy of Jimmy Carter.

If we had a congress that worked they would revolk the pension of Jimmy Carter and seize his international passport. Last, Jimmy's Secrect Service protection should be withdrawn. There is no reason why taxpayers should pay for a man who will do everthing in his power to destroy their way of making a living.




headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2008, 08:49:22 AM »
Great post...I have beaten this one dead as has Eldon. We've also covered it in previous threads. Carter is the worst modern president.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Article from Star Parker
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2008, 09:41:10 AM »
Quote
When Jimmy Carter lost the 1980 election the Soviets were on the march, Communists had bases in Latin America, Americans were paying $1.40 for a gallon of gas (about $3.50 when adjusted for inflation), inflation was running at 15% APR, the prime rate was near 19% APR, the US Auto industry was dying, and modern radical Islamic terrorists had been born.
Which of Carter's policies caused any of these things?
Quote
...

It's just so hard to tell people how bad Carter was. Carter had no grasp of the Federal reserve system. So he told Paul Volcher to pursue a lose monitary policy, and the US financial system almost went insolvent. The only thing that saved the US and international financial system in 1979 was when the West German Deutsche Bank bought up billions of dollars in US currency. The danger was when the dollar would hit less than 1.30 Marks per Dollar. It was that close. If a great depression had hit in 1979 then it would not have passed until 1990 or later.
Carter did not tell Paul Volcker how to do his job.  What does it mean that the US financial system "...almost went insolvent"?
Quote
Jimmy Carter didn't like the fact the oil companies were making money. So, he had a windfall oil profits tax on them. This little tax ignored basic economics, reduce the profitability on a product and you reduce its supply.
Carter instituted a tax on Oil Companies for Windfall Profits.  Sort of makes sense considering the oil companies are one of the most subsidized businesses in our country. 

Quote
The hostage deal defines the word debacle. The truth of the matter was the USA could not even fly 8 helicopters into Iran. Carter had reduced the maintenance funding of the military. By 1980 the US military was reduced to pulling screws out of Jet "A" to keep Jet "B" flying.
I agree with this.  We should have evacuated Iran so that thishostage situation couldn't have happened.

Quote
When Candidate Reagan said Carter had a poor defense record then Carter defended his record by announcing that the US was building a Stealth jet bomber, at that time it was thought to be the F-19 but later turned out to be the F-117. The F-117 was only in proto-type form. However, to defend his record Carter leaked to the press that such a jet was being built.
That's fascinating.
Quote
Carter appointed Cyrus Vance to be the secretary of state. Vance, unable to get our hostages out of Iran's clutches, quit when the US tried to save our hostages with military force.
So what?
Quote
Carter met with the leaders of Israel and Egypt. However, the newly made radical Islamic forces killed the leader of Egypt by 1981. Carter helped give power to the leader of Panama. The result is the nation had to be invaded in 1989 because the leader had set up a narco-terrorist network.
Was that network similar to the Iran/Contra Affair network under President Reagan where Reagan armed our enemies in Iran to support deathsquads in Central America?

Quote
Jimmy Carter will go down as the worst president in the 20th Century. The radical Islamic terrorists who caused 9-11 have their roots in the failed foreign policy of Jimmy Carter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents
Nowhere does Carter come in last place for 20th century presidents.

Quote
If we had a congress that worked they would revolk the pension of Jimmy Carter and seize his international passport. Last, Jimmy's Secrect Service protection should be withdrawn. There is no reason why taxpayers should pay for a man who will do everthing in his power to destroy their way of making a living.
You are referring to impeachment.  No, the current president should be impeached now or after his term for how he's subverted the US Constitution, broke international law and generally ended the lives of 150,000 Iraqis.