Jimmy Carter Says He Would Have Defeated Reagan Had He Been More 'manly'

[Stephanie]

Note that Reagan didn't spend his entire tenure as President blaming Carter for the problems he faced.

and he wrote a lot of his own speeches. I don't think Obama knows how to write one or proof reads them. he's too lazy or playing golf.... so instead he reads off, corpse-man

 

[Ibentoken]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Jimmy Carter did nothing to get the hostages free.

 

[Antares]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Jimmy Carter did nothing to get the hostages free.

Well except lose to Ronnie

 

[Ibentoken]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Jimmy Carter did nothing to get the hostages free.

Well except lose to Ronnie

Now that's quite a spin. Obama is a success because Martians haven't invaded.

 

[BullKurtz]

"I could've been re-elected if I'd taken military action against Iran, shown that I was strong and resolute and, um, manly and so forth," said Carter, adding, "I could have wiped Iran off the map with the weapons that we had, but in the process a lot of innocent people would have been killed, probably including the hostages and so I stood up against all that, er, all that advice, and eventually my prayers were answered and every hostage came home safe and free. And so I think I made the right decision in retrospect, then but it was not easy at the time."
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jimmy-carter-i-could-have-wiped-iran-off-the-map/ar-BB6OYi

And there you have it.....Reagan had to clean up his mess....always been that way, hopefully never will be again if we finally stop electing cowards and thieves. So Jimmah is reflecting on how he could have gotten a second term.....by getting our hostages back from Iran....(still lying when he says "no service men died in combat during my term" ie Eagle Claw) which Reagan did without a shot fired.

Not that Peanut Man wasn't brave.......

 

[rightwinger]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Jimmy Carter did nothing to get the hostages free.

Sure he did

Without a loss of life

 

[rightwinger]

Note that Reagan didn't spend his entire tenure as President blaming Carter for the problems he faced.

and he wrote a lot of his own speeches. I don't think Obama knows how to write one or proof reads them. he's too lazy or playing golf.... so instead he reads off, corpse-man

Too funny

Sure Reagan wrote his own speeches

 

[The Rabbi]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Jimmy Carter did nothing to get the hostages free.

Sure he did

Without a loss of life

And he sacrificed his own second term because he knew Reagan would do a better job so he intentionalluy appeared to be a complete dolt.
Tell us.
Rabbi Rules #2!

 

[aaronleland]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

 

[The Rabbi]

Note that Reagan didn't spend his entire tenure as President blaming Carter for the problems he faced.

and he wrote a lot of his own speeches. I don't think Obama knows how to write one or proof reads them. he's too lazy or playing golf.... so instead he reads off, corpse-man

Too funny

Sure Reagan wrote his own speeches

He actually wrote many of his own speeches. Unlike Obama.

 

[mudwhistle]

Democrats have fantastic hindsight.

Jimmy included.

 

[Ibentoken]

Carter is correct

America looked at him as weak and ineffective in dealing with the Iran embarassment. If he had played tough guy, launched an attack and kicked some Iranian butt...the country would have rallied around him

But with 30 years hindsight, it is obvious that Carter was correct. We ended up getting all our hostages back alive and unharmed. That would not have happened if Carter had attacked

carter was wrong abut everything during his presidency. He has learned nothing. The fact that he even feels the need to say somehting like this today is simply pitiful. He didnt get trounced in the last major landslide because he wasnt tough on Iran.

I guess it depends what you consider a "success"

1. Is a success getting 52 American hostages home alive and unharmed?
2. Is a success having the US look strong on the global stage

If you consider #1 to be a success, then Jimmy Carter was a success
If you consider #2 to be a success, then Carter was a failure

Jimmy Carter did nothing to get the hostages free.

Sure he did

Without a loss of life

Yep and my dog craps gold nuggets.

 

[Ibentoken]

Note that Reagan didn't spend his entire tenure as President blaming Carter for the problems he faced.

and he wrote a lot of his own speeches. I don't think Obama knows how to write one or proof reads them. he's too lazy or playing golf.... so instead he reads off, corpse-man

Too funny

Sure Reagan wrote his own speeches

Reagan knew how to pronounce "Corpsman".

 

[jwoodie]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

 

[Ibentoken]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

That's why the hostages were released. Reagan was now President. Understand?

 

[Antares]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

No, they think Jimmy signed a "secret" deal.

 

[aaronleland]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

What happened? Reagan's inaugural speech frightened Iran into submission? Kinda like how Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech magically caused the Soviet Union to collapse?

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

 

[Antares]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

What happened? Reagan's inaugural speech frightened Iran into submission? Kinda like how Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech magically caused the Soviet Union to collapse?

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Liberal fantasy world.

 

[mudwhistle]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

Reagan scared the Falafel out of those Mullahs.

 

[mudwhistle]

How was Reagan responsible? He was sworn into office minutes before the hostages were released into US custody.

So you think it was merely coincidence? Hmm.

What happened? Reagan's inaugural speech frightened Iran into submission? Kinda like how Reagan's "tear down this wall" speech magically caused the Soviet Union to collapse?

No. They were delaying the negotiations as a way to punish Carter. They were set to release the hostages no matter who was being sworn in that day.

Yeah, even if Carter won.

That would teach him.