NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=18055

I know that has a right-spin to it, but you can't get over the fact that Clinton supports Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March 2.0. The ADL won't condemn this either. Farrakhan's one of the most racist black leaders (yes I said it) in America. I admit, the march has good intention's behind it, but it is sponsored by a man that breeds more racial hate than anyone around. If Strom Thurman had tried anything like this these days, it would fail because of his racist past. I guess it goes to show you that some politicians will do anything to get some support.

Bill Clinton is no longer relevant, he's just going to have to find out that like Gerry Ford, Jimmy Carter, and the rest, he's become a sideshow trotted out every once in a while to amuse the nostalgia bone.

Farrakhan's "Million Man March" didnt' generate a Million men the first time, and it will (following the tendency of these types of events) generate less interest-even with Bubba's endorsement.

This, is in part, because young Black men have better things to do with their time than standing around in D.C. holding signs and chanting slogans-like working, earning a paycheck, earning their diplomas/degrees/etc.

There's always the ones that don't want to put down the effort to do these things, but they're hardly the kind that have the scratch to go to D.C. and stand around all day. In spite of what the scaremongers on teevee say, minorities in the U.S. have better things to do with their time than propping up the celebrities of bygone eras, most of whom are trying desperately to regain the spotlight they lost or squandered.

Bill Clinton is no longer relevant, he's just going to have to find out that like Gerry Ford, Jimmy Carter, and the rest, he's become a sideshow trotted out every once in a while to amuse the nostalgia bone.



Actually, Jimmy Carter has done a great deal as an ex-president. He is far from being a side show. After leaving the presidency, he went on to found the Carter Center, one of the leading human rights organizations in the world. He is a remarkable diplomat who has successfully negotiated cease-fire agreements, peace treaties, the release of hostages, and peaceful resolutions to conflicts. He was the first recipient of the United Nations human rights prize for his post-presidential work in support of human rights. He was awarded the highest US civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom for his human rights work. He even won the Nobel peace prize in 2002 "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development".

In short, by calling Jimmy Carter little more than a sideshow, you have displayed your ignorance and rendered your opinion on this topic useless.

Actually, Jimmy Carter has done a great deal as an ex-president. He is far from being a side show. After leaving the presidency, he went on to found the Carter Center, one of the leading human rights organizations in the world. He is a remarkable diplomat who has successfully negotiated cease-fire agreements, peace treaties, the release of hostages, and peaceful resolutions to conflicts. He was the first recipient of the United Nations human rights prize for his post-presidential work in support of human rights. He was awarded the highest US civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom for his human rights work. He even won the Nobel peace prize in 2002 "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development".

In short, by calling Jimmy Carter little more than a sideshow, you have displayed your ignorance and rendered your opinion on this topic useless.
Take a gander that this article. It's an interesting read.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_v18/ai_4262005

Take a gander that this article. It's an interesting read.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_v18/ai_4262005

It is certainly interesting. I wasnt aware articles that old can be found on the internet. Looks like that website may be an invaluable research tool. However, that article only deals with Carter's presidency. I was reffering to his post-presidential work, which, in my opinion (and probably the opinion of nearly everyone) far surpassed his work as president.

Actually, Jimmy Carter has done a great deal as an ex-president. He is far from being a side show. After leaving the presidency, he went on to found the Carter Center, one of the leading human rights organizations in the world. He is a remarkable diplomat who has successfully negotiated cease-fire agreements, peace treaties, the release of hostages, and peaceful resolutions to conflicts. He was the first recipient of the United Nations human rights prize for his post-presidential work in support of human rights. He was awarded the highest US civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom for his human rights work. He even won the Nobel peace prize in 2002 "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development".

In short, by calling Jimmy Carter little more than a sideshow, you have displayed your ignorance and rendered your opinion on this topic useless.

They'll nominate anyone for a Nobel these days-they nominated Yassir Arafat, for crissakes.

Jimmy Carter has done quite a few things as a private citizen-but nobody's nominating him for U.N. Secretary General, his major (postive) accomplishments have been as Citizen James Carter, not President.

It is certainly interesting. I wasnt aware articles that old can be found on the internet. Looks like that website may be an invaluable research tool. However, that article only deals with Carter's presidency. I was reffering to his post-presidential work, which, in my opinion (and probably the opinion of nearly everyone) far surpassed his work as president.

The article was also a staggering load of crap. To point to Reagan as some sort of moral leader in his foreign policy is just absurd. Any sort of morality that Carter displayed in his presidency Reagan did his damndest to undo. He practically invented Central American military dicatorship. The sources on this are too numerous to go posting here, just go to any library on Earth and read any book on Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panama, or Chile that isn't written by a member of Reagan or Bush's cabinets and you'll see that he was about as bad a person as you can put in the White House without having George W. Bush there.

The article was also a staggering load of crap. To point to Reagan as some sort of moral leader in his foreign policy is just absurd. Any sort of morality that Carter displayed in his presidency Reagan did his damndest to undo. He practically invented Central American military dicatorship. The sources on this are too numerous to go posting here, just go to any library on Earth and read any book on Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panama, or Chile that isn't written by a member of Reagan or Bush's cabinets and you'll see that he was about as bad a person as you can put in the White House without having George W. Bush there.


HUH???

Batista-overthrown 1959 (I believe Ronnie was still making Bonzo movies.)
Pinochet-Came to power well before the 1970's.
Somoza-Overthrown 1979, in power for twenty-some-odd years.

That's three off the top of my head, all three predate both Reagan and Carter presidencies by a factor of Decades.
There were Central And S. American dictatorships when Truman was President, when FDR was, for that matter.
Reagan "invented" not-one-damn thing. the term "Bannana Republic" doesn't just refer to that snazzy clothier-they got it somewhere else, and it was in common usage in the 1960's. (while Ronald Reagan was head of the Screen Actor's guild.)

Jimmy Carter has done quite a few things as a private citizen-but nobody's nominating him for U.N. Secretary General, his major (postive) accomplishments have been as Citizen James Carter, not President.

Make that "Elder Statesman". Let's give proper titles where they're due.

HUH???

Batista-overthrown 1959 (I believe Ronnie was still making Bonzo movies.)
Pinochet-Came to power well before the 1970's.
Somoza-Overthrown 1979, in power for twenty-some-odd years.

That's three off the top of my head, all three predate both Reagan and Carter presidencies by a factor of Decades.
There were Central And S. American dictatorships when Truman was President, when FDR was, for that matter.
Reagan "invented" not-one-damn thing. the term "Bannana Republic" doesn't just refer to that snazzy clothier-they got it somewhere else, and it was in common usage in the 1960's. (while Ronald Reagan was head of the Screen Actor's guild.)

Domici clearly exagerates. And so do you.

The Reagan Doctrine fully supported authoritarian and totalitarian governments and movements, so long as they were anti-communists.

Guess who created Al-Queda? Remember the mujadheen?

Pinochet ruled Chile from 1973 to 1990. Senator Jesse Helms (of all people) denounced the Reagan Administration's cozy relationship with Pinochet.

Somoza was deposed in 1979 (that would be during Carter and just before Regan). Reagan then funded the Contras -- mostly former members of Somoza's government.

(You conveniently ignored Panama and Guatemala and injected Cuba instead.)

Do we really need to list all the dictators we supported during the Reagan years?

(I'm not about to claim that other administrations have not also propped up dictators. But that doesn't exactly make things better does it?)

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=18055

I know that has a right-spin to it, but you can't get over the fact that Clinton supports Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March 2.0. The ADL won't condemn this either. Farrakhan's one of the most racist black leaders (yes I said it) in America. I admit, the march has good intention's behind it, but it is sponsored by a man that breeds more racial hate than anyone around. If Strom Thurman had tried anything like this these days, it would fail because of his racist past. I guess it goes to show you that some politicians will do anything to get some support.

1. Hateful, right-wing rag says a black website says that Clinton says ....

2. The story blatantly lies about the ADL. http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASUS_12/4707_12.htm

3. Farrakhan is a nasty piece of work. He is also not the alpha and omega of the Million More March. There are more than 30 major African-American leaders behind the March.

4. Clinton expressly criticized Farrakhan's involvement in the original Million Man March and has directly condemned Farrakhan's racism and anti-Semitism before.

Don't believe the hype.

Supporting a cause is not the same as supporting one particular douchebag who happens to be at the march.
Trying to say that Clinton is in anyway racist, or should even be compared to Farrakahn, is absurd as comparing Bush to David Duke, simply becuase they're both republicans, and from the South.

As for Carter, I'll allow anyone to slam in him, that has ever won a nobel peace prize, negotiated as many peace treaties, stopped as many third world wars, built as many homes for the homeless, and frankly, worked as tirelessly for the planet in general, as he has.

Like him, or hate him, anyone who tries to deny the good works of Jimmy Carter can eat a bucket of smashed assholes.

Don't believe the hype.

Bill Clinton gave the Chinese 1,000 Neutron bombs in exchange for oral sex and 3 bags of pork rinds. Louis Farrakan aided French spies who infiltrated the traitorous Clinton White house. A Sino-Franc alliance of evil co-opted the commerce dept under Clinton, gaining access through Monica Lewinsky's beret. Monica, a French agent all along, distracted Clinton through oral subterfuge - thus allowing Chinese agents to conduct illegal technology transfers through Acme Corp. The transfer of the Neutron bombs was discovered by Vince Foster. In an attempt to cover his tracks, Clinton killed Foster, bombed the Chinese embassy, and invaded (the formerly French) Haiti. The liberal media has completely ignored this story.

Bill Clinton gave the Chinese 1,000 Neutron bombs in exchange for oral sex and 3 bags of pork rinds. Louis Farrakan aided French spies who infiltrated the traitorous Clinton White house. A Sino-Franc alliance of evil co-opted the commerce dept under Clinton, gaining access through Monica Lewinsky's beret. Monica, a French agent all along, distracted Clinton through oral subterfuge - thus allowing Chinese agents to conduct illegal technology transfers through Acme Corp. The transfer of the Neutron bombs was discovered by Vince Foster. In an attempt to cover his tracks, Clinton killed Foster, bombed the Chinese embassy, and invaded (the formerly French) Haiti. The liberal media has completely ignored this story.

Well, no duh.

I said don't believe the hype, not the facts!

They'll nominate anyone for a Nobel these days-they nominated Yassir Arafat, for crissakes.

You're right, they will, that would be because anyone needs just a government member/university professer to nominate them, and people in power tend to have control over such people.

Source: Noble Peace Prize Nominations (http://nobelprize.org/peace/nomination/nominators.html)

You're right, they will, that would be because anyone needs just a government member/university professer to nominate them, and people in power tend to have control over such people.

Source: Noble Peace Prize Nominations (http://nobelprize.org/peace/nomination/nominators.html)

Of course, there is a slight difference between being nominated and winning.

Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.

Of course, there is a slight difference between being nominated and winning.

Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.

Which I'm not diputing, I'm commenting on how worthless getting nominated for a Noble Prize is, not how easy it is to win one.