2007-07-12 07:00:31 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He crafted the only Middle-East peace treaty that's lasted. Egypt and Israel were in open war, and since Carter set up a treaty, they've been at peace.
That's something no other president can claim rights to.
2007-07-12 07:04:24 · answer #1 · answered by Steve 6 · 1⤊ 7⤋
Nice smart guy, and much much better as an Ex-president. His 4 years economically for the US were the worst 4 years I can remember. This country was in the crapper after his four years. He was the inverse of Bush. Imagine everything Bush has done to the US standing abroad and its righteous standing among countries, now take that destruction and apply it domestically, this is what Carter did.
2007-07-12 07:08:01 · answer #2 · answered by x2000 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
he started the war on Terror. He let Islamic radicals overrun US territory. What more is there to say, when as commander in chief he should have started massive airstrikes against Iran, he did nothing. Had he been strong we could have adapted the Swordfish foriegn policy:
1 American is worth 100,000 Iranians
They blow up a plane we destroy an airport
they blow up a building we destroy a city.
Instead 30+ years later Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons, the radicals can still claim they are the only group to ever overrun US soil and not be kicked off.
2007-07-12 07:25:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Until GW came along he was by far the worst president but GW is gonna make Jimmy look like Regan when his terms up.
2007-07-12 07:12:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Failure in the first degree. Long gas lines. A BUNCH of hostages taken by a combative country. One attempt to rescue them & it was botched. Unemployment high. Interest rates even higher. Astronomical might even describe them better. A failure at trying to broker a deal even between two muslim countries, not to mention Israel. It is this I think of when he dares critizize anyone else. To what he has to say about anything, I lend no credence, but in his defense I must say he kept his hair combed neat. Sort of reminds me of pretty boy John Edwards, now theres another fine piece of work
2007-07-12 07:19:02 · answer #5 · answered by Job1000 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nice guy, not a president. He would've been a great Secretary of State or head of an NGO. He's done good work with Habitat for Humanity. But he wasn't a good president. At all.
2007-07-12 07:13:26 · answer #6 · answered by feline11105 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I like His Leadership with habitat for humanity,
As far as anything else he has ever attmepted, He has sucked and Has no room to bash bush.
THe economy was a disaster when he was president!!
2007-07-14 07:39:22 · answer #7 · answered by the d 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We all know that he was a crappy President. As he has adopted the role of elder statesman, I can't help but wonder how he has come to despise his own country so much. He seems to be the worst blame America first liberal of them all. It's a shame really.
2007-07-12 07:10:55 · answer #8 · answered by booman17 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Correct on the Middle East (America needs to serve as a neutral broker just like we did under Carter with the Egypt / Israel peace agreement) and wrong on just about everything else (Castro, the bogus Venezuela elections which he played a role in and several other areas both domestic and foreign).
Carter is also correct on criticism of this neocon war which is making the situation in the Middle East worse.
Peace Not Apartheid.
2007-07-12 07:04:46 · answer #9 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 6⤋
His efforts with Habitat for Humanity are admirable, but he should stay out of politics. I'm sure he means well, but his meddling seem to cause more harm than good.
2007-07-12 07:17:02 · answer #10 · answered by Mike W 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have no respect for him as an ex president or a man. He is a man with two faces and i have seen them both.
2007-07-12 07:09:42 · answer #11 · answered by ♥ Mel 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋