I am one of the oldsters too! I worked on the Carter campaign in '76. I came from a "lunch pail" Democrat background, and always voted Democrat. I have switched in the last six to eight years to independent/Republican. To some degree the Democrats changed, and to some degree I changed. no party is a "custom fit" for me - it's always "off the rack" - the least bad!
I think both Carter and Clinton are going down the same path, in that what they do tends to make their "base" happy and further alienate their opponents. In other words, they are not changing many minds about them, just reinforcing people's beliefs - the ones they already hold.
I do have issues with the stridency with which they (especially Carter) criticize the current administration. One could argue that Clinton was "defending himself" in the Fox interview, but Carter seems so . . . bitter. Interesting that they, and Bush 43, are all self-professed born-again Christians. I don't think Bush 41 was. Maybe Reagan. Not all that relevant, but what the heck.
Interesting that my memory starts with Nixon. I wish I had a "handle" on Johnson, but no I was too young. As far as ex-presidents go, Nixon seemed to be the one the Sunday talk shows ALWAYS went to for "expert advice," usually in foreign affaris. Until recently, Carter talked only about his Habitat for Humanity activities, and it seemed that Ford, Reagan and Bush 41 rarely were interviewed. Maybe their choice, but possibly an indication of people's evaluation of their expertise, as opposed to specific policy positions.
I wonder what kind of ex-president Bush 43 will be. I know many can't wait to find out! :)
PS I like long questions, and answers!
2006-09-26 04:04:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
You can't fault Jimmy Carter for trying. He was/is a very compassionate man and also a very intelligent individual. He just didn't make a very good President. In terms of public speaking, you're going to get the same thing from Clinton as you do from Carter because any time someone criticizes the decisions they made while in office, they're going to take it personally. The difference is Carter has one thing Clinton doesn't -- humility. You can expect Clinton to bite back hard whenever his administration comes under fire because he is one very smug, egotistical individual.
P.S.: Your first responder needs to get his head out of his @$$ and stop spewing liberal propaganda. President Clinton basically sat back for eight years and took credit for all the work done by one Ronald Wilson Reagan. The current state of the economy can be laid squarely at the feet of Slick Willie because he did diddly-over-squat for the economy and squandered tax dollars on the development of numerous socialist programs that never saw the light of day (thank God). To those who point the finger at Bush and the current Iraq war, if Clinton hadn't blown off the Sudanese when they offered Osama bin Laden up on a silver platter, chances are the U.S.S. Cole disaster and 9/11 would never have happened...
2006-09-26 04:06:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by sarge927 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
I'd have alot more to talk about with President Clinton. I remember alot more about his presidency than Carters (I was too young during Carter's, and its different remembering a period of time compared to reading about it in textbooks) Despite all the sexist jokes, I'd be happy to meet him. I think he was a great president. (before you argue, c'mon, the worst thing the guy did was get a bl.ow.jo.b!)
2016-03-27 10:42:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think Pres carter was less than OK as president. His work with habitat is great and he should stick with it and stay out of politics. Pres Clinton will not be like Carter in doing great charity work. He is too narcisistic to be concerned with the wellbeing of the general public. He is more concerned with how history views his actions as president. Note the interview on fox news.
2006-09-26 04:05:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't see your connection between Clinton and Carter at all. As far as their philosophies of governing go.
If you are referring to Clinton's interview on FOX news on Sunday and you didn't see the whole thing, then I can see why you are asking this question.
I think Bush puts his foot in his mouth everytime he speaks and perhaps you should be more worried about that.
2006-09-26 05:13:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Big Bear 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Clinton has already been involved in Charity and Relief services, so you can't say that he and Carter don't have that in common. Carter's main problem was his lack of willingness to use the military until it was too late, something Clinton was much more willing to do.
2006-09-26 04:18:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by ddey65 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Clinton doesn't hold a candle to Jimmy Carter's class,intrigrity or honor!
2006-09-26 04:28:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by bulabate 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
You sure voted for some losers, included the supposedly beloved JFK. He and his brothers Bobby and Teddy were losers too (Teddy still is). If you don't understand this, read the well footnoted DOCUMENTARY "The Dark Side of Camelot" by Pulitzer Prize winning author S. Hersh.
They weren't about democracy, they were about power and sex, and they were very cozy with organized crime.
2006-09-26 04:07:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by senior citizen 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
I too thought that JFK was the best thing ever to happen to this country, but I feel that Bill Clinton will make a great First Lady.
2006-09-26 03:58:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
As a anti, Clinton I can tell you history well treat him good. He did a lot of good things. They was greatness but bad decisions will haunt him.. He will probibly go down as a better Pres. than IKE, and everyone liked IKE.. That is history speaking not me.
2006-09-26 04:05:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Scott B 4
·
0⤊
2⤋