« Making memories downtown | Main | Population growth »

April 24, 2008

Defending Jimmy Carter

I disagree with Marilyn Crews’ comments(4/19, Letters, “Criticism of Jimmy Carter”). She says Mr. Carter “travels the world putting down the United States” but fails to identify the putdowns.

If “putting down” means that he is critical of actions taken by the Bush administration, then please recognize that the right to criticize leadership is part of living in a democracy.

With respect to his visit with Hamas: Mr. Carter recently announced that what he did was submit a written question to Hamas leadership. He asked that if the Palestinian people voted to accept a peace agreement with Israel based on recognizing Israel as a state and pushing property lines back to what they were before the 1967 war, would Hamas agree? He gave the request to Hamas leadership, and after hours of consultation among themselves Hamas leaders said yes to accepting such an agreement.

Please acquaint yourself with the work of the Carter Center before you condemn him.

Jerry Nowak
Lee’s Summit

In response to recent criticism of former President Carter’s statesmanship, I would respectfully suggest that he may be held in far greater global esteem than some of our present leaders, who seem to understand diplomacy as negotiating behind the barrel of a gun.

Carter has long supported Habitat for Humanity in the United States and overseas, and he established an institute that promotes global health, democracy and human rights. He is known and respected for his work in monitoring elections around the world. He brokered the Camp David accords in 1978, in an effort to bring peace to the Middle East, and was the recipient of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize. This is surely the background of a humanitarian and a statesman.

I would further suggest that the reason he is currently receiving criticism in Israel is that his remarks may be very close to the truth.

Keith Hustings


big dreamer

Hey have any of the idiots around me every thought that perhaps dialog and discussion is a GOOD THING? You all enjoy sharing your opinions here, why not TALK to the bad guys or other human beings about what they really want. Perhaps a dialog without all the BS surrounding it is exactly what is needed. Maybe it is time we, as a nation, start to TALK to all these supposed terrorist supporting entities and see what it is we can do to help them out. Perhaps that would start to bring about some real change. To understand the others point of view sometimes you must shut your mouth and open your ears.


Good morning Engineer,

The term scientist in itself is very misleading. A researcher in atomic energy could be considered a scientist pertaing to his field, but his opinions on the effect of atomic enrgies on waster in the large lakes we like to fish near the plants requires a different type of scientist.

I don't think there is an industry standard for experts in global warming. What is this gynecologist (by trade) is someone who has researched the available information and formulated a theory, or given the information on a theory has studied it and agrees with its findings? Why would you rule that person out as qualified?

Finally, what makes your opinion correct and the people who signed wrong?


Engineer, you have really challenged me with your mention of 'gynecologist' in your position on Global Warming. It sounds like 'a spreader of old wives' tales.' Perhaps, like the sky is falling, it implies where Global Warming is concerned, we bend over, spread our legs, and kiss our a--s goodbye.



It's just that many of those who have signed on as 'scientists" supporting global warming have qualifications similar to your own. On one list of 'scientists supporting" one of the signers was a gynecologist. More of scientists than you perhaps, but hardly an authority on climate. As for quite a few of the others, no conspiracy, but that's where the grant money is.
I will say that reading some of your remarks about Kate brings to mind Lee Marvin’s line “me by accident of birth. But you, sir, are a self made man”.


Speaking of misfits, what happened to Sophie? Did they finally commit her? I departed Unfetter Letters last year when Sophie was in her manic stage.



I may have overreacted a bit, but your Rosie response cut pretty deep, she's a scourge on society. I think we're even.


WPS, We bicker back and forth here, but for the most part we are decent people. I learned a long time ago not to dish it out if I couldn’t take it, but there is a line I try not to cross. I sincerely appreciate what others said today on my behalf, but I would expect that if I ever stoop to crossing the line, as you did, they would be just as quick to call me on it.


No thanks Solomon, I prefer my nickname for him better. I have to think when I type BruodgduyeT. He's not worth that much thought.



The correct spelling for our amalmagated friend is "BruodgduyeT". Please use it only in veneration.



You wrote "Al Gore's garbage", why didn't you call it a global warming conspiracy? I'm sure that's what you consider it, right? I guess it must be hard to refute someone else's conspiracy while you cling to your own. Just change the wording, that will work on the stupid people.

By the way, thanks for taking my blog alias seriously, that makes posting worth my time. It's so ridiculous, I can't stop laughing. I mean, seriously Engineer, who uses their real profession for their alias? Oh, never mind.


I've read this blog once or twice, and class is obviously not a requirement for posting.

Kate directed a jab at me, and I responded in kind, albeit more harshly. If she can dish it out, she should be able to take it.

Chris'IQis40 - I'll be looking forward to your admonishments to "stay classy" from those you agree with like BrogueT, because I'm sure your not a hypocrite.


I'm beginning to understand where they get all the scientists that buy into Al Gore's garbage. The "October Surprise" was a complete fabrication but like the then Speaker of the House, Jim Wright, said "Because of the seriousness of the charge the fact that there is no evidence to support it makes it even more important that we investigate it". Or words to that effect.


Suggest we limit our comments to the message and not the messenger. Carter was President 1977-81. One of the most devastating stock market crashes in U.S. history occurred in 1987,undoubtedly caused in part, by 18-20% interest rates during the Carter administration.

Let's avoid amateur hour when talking about such recent history. Think we have more than exposed Jimmy Carter today for what he is and definitely what he is not.



You stay classy, wellpaidscientist.


I understand it's been refuted, but I also don't beleive a legitimate inquiry was done 6 years after Nixon resigned. People stil didn't trust the government after Watergate, and if this conspiracy theory were true, it would have been catastrophic for the 2 dominate parties that continue to ruin this country.

You're wrong about my absence, I've been attending BrogueT's school of blog humor, and also studying Arabic and Spanish per his suggestion.

Eat your liver, Kate, you maroon, lol. See, I got an A+


WPS, both houses of Congress investigated the theory and determined there was nothing to it, but if you insist on remaining skeptical until you hear it from me, then so be it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise_conspiracy_theory

You’ve been absent a while, presumably attending a Rose O’Donnell Conspiracy Theory Seminar, followed by her School of Wit and Charm.



please ease up on calling the women on this thread whoooooooooooores. There are very many nouns and adjectives acceptable but that is not one of them. lets be creative in our invectives.......


Right, don't refute it, just reply with some complete, unrelated nonsense. I have no idea what your talking about, so the anwswer would be no.

My turn now. Are all the women in your family whores, or just you?


Ahh, yes, that would be the October Surprise Conspiracy Theory. Say, do you also happen to have a friend whose 100mpg car was recalled to the factory?


"Do you think it was mere coincidence that they were released the moment he left office"

It wasn't a coincidence, it was planned by Reagan. He had an agreement with the Iranians to keep the hostages until he took office, in exchange for illegally selling thems arms. The hostages were released the same hour that Reagan was sworn in. Reagan was fine letting our hostages stay in captivity so he could win the election. It was the ultimate october surprise, and also an inconvinient fact for those who worhsip at the altar of a B-movie actor turned senile politician. Thankfully he never drooled on "the button" and shorted it out.

About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright