Why did Jimmy Carter accomplish so little during his 4 years as president?

[Geaux4it]

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

 

[KissMy]

You have to be one of the dumbest assholes on this board. Listen carefully now. Carter was still president, yes, for one more day. The Iranians had to make a deal BEFORE Reagan was sworn in or risk having their country reduced to rubble. It doesn't matter WHO brokered the deal, the deal would not have been made if Carter had won the election. I never said Reagan brokered the fucking deal, dumbass, I said he was the REASON the deal was brokered. Damn, you are an idiot.

You only believe propaganda & political hype. You are clueless to facts. FACT: Carter had Iraq attack Iran KILLING a MILLION Iranians. Iran was begging Carter to end the embargo & release the $Billions of their money we had seized, so they could use it to buy weapons & aircraft parts to end the slaughter. Carter forced Iran into releasing all the US hostages, not Reagan campaign B.S.

Reagan was such a wimp he traded arms to Iran for hostages. Reagan did not have Iranians slaughtered like Carter did. Reagan lied & negotiated with terrorist.

You're living in a fantasy world. Carter was weak an indecisive the whole time he was in office. He didn't have a clue about how to lead.

Sorry you are such a follower that you need a dear leader to guide you.

 

[CowboyTed]

Thing is Carter ran a small deficit, 79 billion was its max.

Regan ran huge deficits in comparison...

So the question has to be asked how did Reagan get it so fiscally wrong after Carter?

Carter also took the route of not importing illegal drugs into America to pay various death squads in South America.

He also didn't sell arms to Iran.

So can our RWers here please stop your usual propaganda and focus on the truth.

Carter was better at fiscal policy and peacekeeper.

Regan just caused massive social problems by importing drugs for illegal wars. Borrowed like a drunken sailor....

So keep going ya idiots...

 

[Geaux4it]

^^^^^ Thanks for pointing out contributing factors to Carters failure in Chief tenure

-Geaux

 

[Meathead]

Carter's only achievement of note was the Camp David Accord. His failure in just about everything else obscure that, especially his handling of the hostage situation. He has since been a model of presidential failure for consecutive presidents until Obama in whose footsteps he follows.

 

[KissMy]

Repubtards hate presidents who do not run massive deficits on wars & tax cuts for wealthy.

 

[Pogo]

Still waiting for pogo to respond to his statement about the "October Surprise" that he claimed happened but has no evidence of. Or has he changed his mind and abandoned his claim?

I've never made any such claim. You just can't read.

 

[Pogo]

Reagan had nothing to do with it. They would have been released even had Carter been relected.

Yeah, sure. Then you agree there was no "October Surprise"?

Reagan had nothing to do with it. Deal with it.

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

So you're suggesting the international diplomatic community -- officials who do that for a living -- were incapable of seeing through political campaign rhetoric, while the American electorate --- those that think deep political rumination consists of:

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

--- DID see through it? You're actually suggesting somebody out there is stupider than that?

Holy SHIT you're a fucking moron.

They were leaving Iranian airspace at that moment because they couldn't do it the night before (the day the agreement was signed), the Iranian airstrip being shut down at night because of the war going on, Dumbass. Your comic book fantasies of Reagan the Destroyer are just that. Carter and Christopher got it done, and it was done before Reagan stepped up to take the oath. No "messages" needed. The messages were on paper, in Algiers. January 19. Carter as a lame duck could have let it go; he chose to pursue it until it got done, and didn't ask for the glory, even though morons like you would think Reagan had some magic button under his podium marked "release hostages".

Earth doesn't work that way, but congratulations on being hoodwinked by a media image in lieu of reading actual history.

And btw as far as that war monger rhetoric -- apparently it was correct as a prediction. Carter never attacked anybody; no POTUS since can say that.

 

[BlindBoo]

Carter's policies broke the back of run-away inflation

Carter's policies CAUSED runaway inflation, dummy.

help initiate the downfall of the Soviet Union.

Damn! What planet are you living on???

Baloney.

" rising inflation caused by runaway spending in the 1960s and a feckless Federal Reserve response in the 1970s. Then there were a pair of OPEC oil shocks. Then add in a high-tax, high-regulation economy and you have a recipe for disaster."

What If Ford Had Won in 1976?

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, sure. Then you agree there was no "October Surprise"?

Reagan had nothing to do with it. Deal with it.

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

Wrong again. I understood exactly what you're saying. I reject it as idiotic as Iran did not fear Reagan. Evidence of that can be garnered from their backing of a Hezbollah attack of a military barracks in Beirut, killing some 241 of our servicemen. You know, what you call "fear." As far as your idiocy about them feeling threatened that Reagan would attack them, need I remind you ... ? Reagan didn't even attack them after they killed 241 members of our military. Instead, he tried to show the world what a tough guy he was by attacking Grenada instead.

Whether you understand this or not is irrelevant ... Reagan had nothing to do with the release of the hostages.

Just keep telling yourself that, maybe it'll make you feel better about the biggest failed presidency of the 20th century.

 

[S.J.]

Well, I guess you're gonna have to duke it out with pogo and sillybooboo because they're quite certain that Reagan and Bush made a deal with the Iranians to keep the hostages until inauguration day to make sure Carter lost (like he wouldn't have anyway). You libs need to get on the same page. Incidentally, exactly what was the deal that Carter made with the Iranians?

I don't need to sort anything out. I showed you Carter announced the deal while he was still president and it was executed before Reagan was sworn in.

Hey dumbshit, there was no deal until AFTER Carter lost the election in 1980. Carter didn't get them released, their fear of a President Reagan is what got them released.

The voices in your head must be shouting out the windows of an insane asylum.

Address the topic or fuck off, troll.

lol, a big blurty meltdown by a poster who can't handle spot on criticism.

You made no "spot on criticism", moron. You made another one of your empty troll posts that had nothing to do with anything anyone has been discussing. Grow up.

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, sure. Then you agree there was no "October Surprise"?

Reagan had nothing to do with it. Deal with it.

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

So you're suggesting the international diplomatic community -- officials who do that for a living -- were incapable of seeing through political campaign rhetoric, while the American electorate --- those that think deep political rumination consists of:

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

--- DID see through it? You're actually suggesting somebody out there is stupider than that?

Holy SHIT you're a fucking moron.

They were leaving Iranian airspace at that moment because they couldn't do it the night before (the day the agreement was signed), the Iranian airstrip being shut down at night because of the war going on, Dumbass. Your comic book fantasies of Reagan the Destroyer are just that. Carter and Christopher got it done, and it was done before Reagan stepped up to take the oath. No "messages" needed. The messages were on paper, in Algiers. January 19. Carter as a lame duck could have let it go; he chose to pursue it until it got done, and didn't ask for the glory, even though morons like you would think Reagan had some magic button under his podium marked "release hostages".

Earth doesn't work that way, but congratulations on being hoodwinked by a media image in lieu of reading actual history.

And btw as far as that war monger rhetoric -- apparently it was correct as a prediction. Carter never attacked anybody; no POTUS since can say that.

Poor little pogo can't put enough lipstick on that pig to make it attractive. Carter was a coward as well as an inbred idiot. Biggest failure in presidential history, followed by the biggest presidential success in history. How does it feel to be in the position of having to defend the moronic loser who gave us the worst economy of the century and beyond? You should be better at it after defending the Kommunist Kenyan for 7 years but I guess it's an impossible task, especially since you're also an idiot.

 

[Pogo]

Reagan had nothing to do with it. Deal with it.

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

So you're suggesting the international diplomatic community -- officials who do that for a living -- were incapable of seeing through political campaign rhetoric, while the American electorate --- those that think deep political rumination consists of:

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

--- DID see through it? You're actually suggesting somebody out there is stupider than that?

Holy SHIT you're a fucking moron.

They were leaving Iranian airspace at that moment because they couldn't do it the night before (the day the agreement was signed), the Iranian airstrip being shut down at night because of the war going on, Dumbass. Your comic book fantasies of Reagan the Destroyer are just that. Carter and Christopher got it done, and it was done before Reagan stepped up to take the oath. No "messages" needed. The messages were on paper, in Algiers. January 19. Carter as a lame duck could have let it go; he chose to pursue it until it got done, and didn't ask for the glory, even though morons like you would think Reagan had some magic button under his podium marked "release hostages".

Earth doesn't work that way, but congratulations on being hoodwinked by a media image in lieu of reading actual history.

And btw as far as that war monger rhetoric -- apparently it was correct as a prediction. Carter never attacked anybody; no POTUS since can say that.

Poor little pogo can't put enough lipstick on that pig to make it attractive. Carter was a coward as well as an inbred idiot. Biggest failure in presidential history, followed by the biggest presidential success in history. How does it feel to be in the position of having to defend the moronic loser who gave us the worst economy of the century and beyond? You should be better at it after defending the Kommunist Kenyan for 7 years but I guess it's an impossible task, especially since you're also an idiot.

So --- nothing but ad hom for an argument. Poor SJ.

A "coward" for getting hostages released without war? A "coward" for being the only POTUS in 83 years who never fired a shot? We need more of them thar "cowards".

 

[S.J.]

Carter's policies broke the back of run-away inflation

Carter's policies CAUSED runaway inflation, dummy.

help initiate the downfall of the Soviet Union.

Damn! What planet are you living on???

Baloney.

" rising inflation caused by runaway spending in the 1960s and a feckless Federal Reserve response in the 1970s. Then there were a pair of OPEC oil shocks. Then add in a high-tax, high-regulation economy and you have a recipe for disaster."

What If Ford Had Won in 1976?

Yeah, blame Carter's inflationary policies on the 60s. That'll work. Reagan showed Carter how to deal with OPEC, didn't he? Gas prices fell by two thirds after deregulation. No more gas lines. Face it, Carter had no clue. His entire presidency was like a rudderless ship drifting aimlessly in a cesspool of incompetency.

 

[S.J.]

You have to be one of the dumbest assholes on this board. Listen carefully now. Carter was still president, yes, for one more day. The Iranians had to make a deal BEFORE Reagan was sworn in or risk having their country reduced to rubble. It doesn't matter WHO brokered the deal, the deal would not have been made if Carter had won the election. I never said Reagan brokered the fucking deal, dumbass, I said he was the REASON the deal was brokered. Damn, you are an idiot.

You only believe propaganda & political hype. You are clueless to facts. FACT: Carter had Iraq attack Iran KILLING a MILLION Iranians. Iran was begging Carter to end the embargo & release the $Billions of their money we had seized, so they could use it to buy weapons & aircraft parts to end the slaughter. Carter forced Iran into releasing all the US hostages, not Reagan campaign B.S.

Reagan was such a wimp he traded arms to Iran for hostages. Reagan did not have Iranians slaughtered like Carter did. Reagan lied & negotiated with terrorist.

You're living in a fantasy world. Carter was weak an indecisive the whole time he was in office. He didn't have a clue about how to lead.

Sorry you are such a follower that you need a dear leader to guide you.

Sorry you can't come up with a better response than that.

 

[S.J.]

Repubtards hate presidents who do not run massive deficits on wars & tax cuts for wealthy.

How about one that shows Obama's debt?

 

[Faun]

Reagan had nothing to do with it. Deal with it.

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

Wrong again. I understood exactly what you're saying. I reject it as idiotic as Iran did not fear Reagan. Evidence of that can be garnered from their backing of a Hezbollah attack of a military barracks in Beirut, killing some 241 of our servicemen. You know, what you call "fear." As far as your idiocy about them feeling threatened that Reagan would attack them, need I remind you ... ? Reagan didn't even attack them after they killed 241 members of our military. Instead, he tried to show the world what a tough guy he was by attacking Grenada instead.

Whether you understand this or not is irrelevant ... Reagan had nothing to do with the release of the hostages.

Just keep telling yourself that, maybe it'll make you feel better about the biggest failed presidency of the 20th century.

Spits the idiot who thinks the country who sponsored an attack killing 241 U.S. servicemen ... was afraid of Reagan.

Yes folks, conservatives truly are as dumb as they appear. It's not just an act.

 

[Faun]

Reagan had nothing to do with it. Deal with it.

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

So you're suggesting the international diplomatic community -- officials who do that for a living -- were incapable of seeing through political campaign rhetoric, while the American electorate --- those that think deep political rumination consists of:

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

--- DID see through it? You're actually suggesting somebody out there is stupider than that?

Holy SHIT you're a fucking moron.

They were leaving Iranian airspace at that moment because they couldn't do it the night before (the day the agreement was signed), the Iranian airstrip being shut down at night because of the war going on, Dumbass. Your comic book fantasies of Reagan the Destroyer are just that. Carter and Christopher got it done, and it was done before Reagan stepped up to take the oath. No "messages" needed. The messages were on paper, in Algiers. January 19. Carter as a lame duck could have let it go; he chose to pursue it until it got done, and didn't ask for the glory, even though morons like you would think Reagan had some magic button under his podium marked "release hostages".

Earth doesn't work that way, but congratulations on being hoodwinked by a media image in lieu of reading actual history.

And btw as far as that war monger rhetoric -- apparently it was correct as a prediction. Carter never attacked anybody; no POTUS since can say that.

Poor little pogo can't put enough lipstick on that pig to make it attractive. Carter was a coward as well as an inbred idiot. Biggest failure in presidential history, followed by the biggest presidential success in history. How does it feel to be in the position of having to defend the moronic loser who gave us the worst economy of the century and beyond? You should be better at it after defending the Kommunist Kenyan for 7 years but I guess it's an impossible task, especially since you're also an idiot.

Pretty funny given Carter ranks around the 27th best president out of 43 -- while Dubya falls in with the bottom 10 at 34.

Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States

 

[Geaux4it]

Was that a yes or a no?

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

So you're suggesting the international diplomatic community -- officials who do that for a living -- were incapable of seeing through political campaign rhetoric, while the American electorate --- those that think deep political rumination consists of:

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

--- DID see through it? You're actually suggesting somebody out there is stupider than that?

Holy SHIT you're a fucking moron.

They were leaving Iranian airspace at that moment because they couldn't do it the night before (the day the agreement was signed), the Iranian airstrip being shut down at night because of the war going on, Dumbass. Your comic book fantasies of Reagan the Destroyer are just that. Carter and Christopher got it done, and it was done before Reagan stepped up to take the oath. No "messages" needed. The messages were on paper, in Algiers. January 19. Carter as a lame duck could have let it go; he chose to pursue it until it got done, and didn't ask for the glory, even though morons like you would think Reagan had some magic button under his podium marked "release hostages".

Earth doesn't work that way, but congratulations on being hoodwinked by a media image in lieu of reading actual history.

And btw as far as that war monger rhetoric -- apparently it was correct as a prediction. Carter never attacked anybody; no POTUS since can say that.

Poor little pogo can't put enough lipstick on that pig to make it attractive. Carter was a coward as well as an inbred idiot. Biggest failure in presidential history, followed by the biggest presidential success in history. How does it feel to be in the position of having to defend the moronic loser who gave us the worst economy of the century and beyond? You should be better at it after defending the Kommunist Kenyan for 7 years but I guess it's an impossible task, especially since you're also an idiot.

So --- nothing but ad hom for an argument. Poor SJ.

A "coward" for getting hostages released without war? A "coward" for being the only POTUS in 83 years who never fired a shot? We need more of them thar "cowards".

Like Obama supporters, your loyalty to another failure Jimmy Carter is noted. Welcome to the minority who are wrong in both cases you state

Yeah, Jimmy Carter the success. LMAO

-Geaux

 

[Pogo]

I have no knowledge of that so I'm not speculating about it. What I did say was Reagan had nothing to do with the hostages being released.

I'm going to assume you misunderstood what I was saying about Reagan regarding the hostages. I have never claimed he had anything to do with negotiating their release. I AM saying, however, that Iran feared a Reagan presidency and in part because during that campaign Carter and the Democratic Party were constantly calling Reagan a war monger to scare the voters into not voting for him. The American people weren't falling for it though but many of our adversaries were, including the Soviets and Iran. Reagan had referred to the hostages as "prisoners of war", which was designed to send a message to the Iranians, and they got the message. You can believe whatever you want about why they were released the conventional wisdom at the time was that they were afraid Reagan was going to use military force against them so they released the hostages before he was sworn in. The hostages were leaving Iranian air space AS Reagan was being sworn in.

So you're suggesting the international diplomatic community -- officials who do that for a living -- were incapable of seeing through political campaign rhetoric, while the American electorate --- those that think deep political rumination consists of:

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

--- DID see through it? You're actually suggesting somebody out there is stupider than that?

Holy SHIT you're a fucking moron.

They were leaving Iranian airspace at that moment because they couldn't do it the night before (the day the agreement was signed), the Iranian airstrip being shut down at night because of the war going on, Dumbass. Your comic book fantasies of Reagan the Destroyer are just that. Carter and Christopher got it done, and it was done before Reagan stepped up to take the oath. No "messages" needed. The messages were on paper, in Algiers. January 19. Carter as a lame duck could have let it go; he chose to pursue it until it got done, and didn't ask for the glory, even though morons like you would think Reagan had some magic button under his podium marked "release hostages".

Earth doesn't work that way, but congratulations on being hoodwinked by a media image in lieu of reading actual history.

And btw as far as that war monger rhetoric -- apparently it was correct as a prediction. Carter never attacked anybody; no POTUS since can say that.

Poor little pogo can't put enough lipstick on that pig to make it attractive. Carter was a coward as well as an inbred idiot. Biggest failure in presidential history, followed by the biggest presidential success in history. How does it feel to be in the position of having to defend the moronic loser who gave us the worst economy of the century and beyond? You should be better at it after defending the Kommunist Kenyan for 7 years but I guess it's an impossible task, especially since you're also an idiot.

So --- nothing but ad hom for an argument. Poor SJ.

A "coward" for getting hostages released without war? A "coward" for being the only POTUS in 83 years who never fired a shot? We need more of them thar "cowards".

Like Obama supporters, your loyalty to another failure Jimmy Carter is noted. Welcome to the minority who are wrong in both cases you state

Yeah, Jimmy Carter the success. LMAO

-Geaux

Feel absolutely free to flesh out the folderol with some kind of evidence beyond braying "you're wrong".

You know, with some kind of evidence. Something a bit juicier than

Carter has no nads just like O-tard Odummy.

Couple a grade 'A' candy asses

-Geaux

I'll check back on your progress.