Verbosities

Seems like BG was upset with the boys on MSNBC last night.

But it is not the least bit funny to accuse a Nobel Prize-winning democratically
elected former leader of this country of speaking for the terrorists (or whoever
this presumed "other team" is supposed to be). Actually, it's not the least bit
funny to baselessly accuse any American citizen of speaking for the terrorists.
It's not funny, and it's not serious. It's patently lazy and slanderous, and in
my eyes is far far worse than anything Imus ever said to get kicked off the
airwaves.

No, it isn't funny. The actions of this former president are far from humorous. Carter is in no position to rank someone's presidential performance. From Slate>Christopher Hitchens:

...whether in Afghanistan, Iran, or Iraq—still the source of so many of our
woes—the Carter administration could not tell a friend from an enemy. His
combination of naivete and cynicism—from open-mouthed shock at Leonid Brezhnev's occupation of Afghanistan to underhanded support for Saddam in his unsleeping campaign of megalomania—had terrible consequences that are with us still. It's hardly an exaggeration to say that every administration since has had to deal with the chaotic legacy of Carter's mind-boggling cowardice and incompetence.

One can can Google various questionable actions by this former President and wonder whose side he is truly on. One site conveniently lists some for you. Censure Carter.com. They include:

• Jimmy Carter Praises Hamas, "So Called Terrorists"
• Carter Praises Terrorist Leader Yasser Arafat
• Carter Tied to Iraqi Agent Samir Vincent
• Jimmy Carter: America Basher

You get the point. Carter is still stuck on his own thought of what peace is. Just as he did then, he does now. He cannot distinguish ally from enemy.

But here is where BG is wrong. "Actually, it's not the least bitfunny to baselessly accuse any American citizen of speaking for the terrorists." There is a basis. One beyond some of the items noted above. Heck some argue he does so in his very own book, Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid.

World Net Daily>Joseph Farah>Between the Lines

Carter writes: "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all
significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide
bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate
goals of the Roadmap for Peace are accepted by Israel."

But it is the comment of Melvin Konner, anthropology professor at Emory University that is noteworthy and shows how one can have the opinion of Carter supporting terrorism. He was ask to advise on how to respond to criticism of the book. His response to the sentence above:

"I cannot find any way to read this sentence that does not condone
the murder of Jews until such time as Israel unilaterally follows President
Carter's prescription for peace. The sentence, simply put, makes President
Carter an apologist for terrorists and places my children, along with all Jews
everywhere, in greater danger."

I guess if you miss the message from the guys at Media Matters, you may get upset. Their comments are far from "lazy and slanderous" Carter's actions speak for themselves. There is no reason for Cramer to ask what purpose does his comments serve. The answer is clear and simple. They are self serving and do no good for America. A shameless attempt to fool America into thinking his 4 years were an utter and complete disaster.

There was a time when former Presidents would not speak of the actions of the current administation. Nixon didn't. Ford didn't. Reagan didn't. Bush didn't. Maybe Carter should fall back into step.