Piling on Jimmy Carter

Everyone seems to be taking shots at Jimmy Carter today. By everyone, I mean the world of bloggers. Sister Toldja, Powerline and Crotchety Old Bastard get their licks in today. It’s probably because he’s an elitist SOB who has never gotten over his 1980 defeat. or it could be because he writes crap like this in the Washington Post;

I am concerned that public discussion of my book “Palestine Peace Not Apartheid” has been diverted from the book’s basic proposals: that peace talks be resumed after six years of delay and that the tragic persecution of Palestinians be ended. Although most critics have not seriously disputed or even mentioned the facts and suggestions about these two issues, an apparently concerted campaign has been focused on the book’s title, combined with allegations that I am anti-Israel. This is not good for any of us who are committed to Israel’s status as a peaceful nation living in harmony with its neighbors.

So, because no one is paying attention to what he’s saying in his book, we all deserve to die? Every time someone does pay attention to his book, they find lies and misrepresentations – lies and misrepresentations he refuses to defend in public. Of coourse the media calls it polarizing the discussion about the Middle East, but an intellectually honest person would call it propaganda.

Carter calls the politics in Israel apartheid and refers to the Israeli occupation – two terms that are so rigid in their meaning, there’s no room for discussion. Carter has purposely used extreme terms to stifle debate. He only demands agreement;

Abbas is wise in repeating to Secretary Rice that he rejects any “interim” boundaries for the Palestinian state. The step-by-step road-map formula promulgated almost three years ago for reaching a final agreement has proved to be a non-starter — and an excuse for not making any progress.

So everyone should give in completely to the Palestinians? No “roadmap”? No concessions? And, jimmy, why don’t you tell us why the “step-by-step” formula doesn’t work? Maybe because the Palestinians are so steeped in their hatred of Israelis that they can’t help but kill Israelis no matter what the Israelis give the Palestinians.

The premise of exchanging Arab territory for peace has been acceptable for several decades to a majority of Israelis but not to a minority of the more conservative leaders, who are unfortunately supported by most of the vocal American Jewish community.

And what happened last year when the Israelis exchanged territory for peace? Did they get peace?

See Carter playing fast and loose with the truth is not new. He promised in his “malaise speech” that he would build refineries and piplines which never materialized. He promised before the 1976 election that he would never surrender the Panama Canal Zone to Panamanians.

I wrote a paper in college about the Torrijos-Carter Treaty and I had to read his “Keeping the Faith” memoirs and discovered a paragraph that explained why he figured the American people were for giving away the Canal. He explained that even though only 20% of Americans agreed we should give up that resource, 75% of Americans who “understood the issue” as he did agreed with him.

That’s what Jimmy Carter thinks of the average American. That’s why he lost the 1980 election and why he continues to be the worst ex-President in history.

UPDATE: According to Fox News Channel (by way of Little Green Footballs) I’m reading that Brandeis will allow Alan Dershowitz to rebut Carter after Carter’s lecture there next week.

Category: Jimmy Carter, Politics