There’s an ongoing debate among right-wingers (such as me) about who was the worse president: Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton. Well, today Carter’s out shooting off his pie hole about North Korean nukes being at least partially Bush’s fault. That’s

Let me add, if we’re looking for someone to blame, and you don’t want to blame Mr. I’m-So-Wonley, how about the King of the Useful Idiots, Jimmy Carter, who negotiated that useless Agreed Framework in 1994 with the current dictator’s father?

…

Congratulations again, Dragonlady, for taking the win. Dragonlady’s like some kind of winning machine; it’s awesome. Yes, to everyone, it is correct that Jimmy Carter is a moron. He is like Bill Clinton without the fox attitude. Of course, I…

You just can’t believe promises made by a psychotic dictator who’ll gladly starve his own people to make sure his army is fed.

I believe Madeline Albright admitted two years ago that North Korea cheated. Big surprise. Who would’ve thought a regime like that would’ve cheated?

- Carter made an absolute mess out of the ME, starting with such statesmanship jewels as managing to get our embassy, and its personel “kidnapped”. His entire Presidency was an national embarrassment, until Reagan was sworn in, and an hour later the Iranian’s freed the Embassy. A great deal of the WOT problems we are now having to deal with are a direct result of the peanut farmers total unsuitability to hold public office, much less be president. Its possible his brother Billy, the family drunk, had more common sense that Jhimmi. The man is now simply senile, and will go to his grave trying in vain to revise history. But a clown is always a clown.

- Now we see the Demdorks yammering about how “well” Clinton and Maggies appeasement approach worked. Never mind the recent actions of NK, and the fact they were steadily developing bombs, ignoring every promise they ever made, and playing Clinton and his peace-nik administration like a fine violin.

- Even worse the Liberals have been trying to juggle so many balls – one on one, no coilition – no one on one – no colition, over and over and over. we tried their way, ad nausua, and this is what we got for it.

- I could blast holes through all their hysterical revisions and papering over the truth you could drive a 747 through, McCain did it quite well as soon as the Dem leadership started spewing their lies and trying to push it all on Bush, but it’s easier just to put it this way:

General advice for Dems -

We’ll leave it to your side to carry on the important work of propping up the “Clinton legacy”, work your party is uniquely suited for, while our side deals with the real problems as usual. No one will be surprised, especially the voters.

- That will give you ample time to figure out pithy response’s to deal with Clinton’s dalliance’s. Things like moistening his cigars in Monika’s “essense”, while all of this was going on, and the NK was laughing at you behind your appeasing backs, taking all your handouts, and going right ahead with their plans. Little Kim made a fool out of your party and your fearless “diddler”.

- Might be more apropos if you saved your anger for Kim and N. Korea. Oh thats right, I forgot. Progressives only yell their garbage at people that won’t cut their heads off or throw them in a gulag. Lot safer that way.

You have a lot of revising to do, so you need to get busy. Don’t worry about America. It’s in good hands, and you have important issues to deal with like “image”.

- Carter I don’t even bother with anymore. The best we can hope for is that he doesn’t cause anymore disasters.

- Bang

Riehl World View

If I had ta’ yammer, I’d yammer in the morninJIMMY CARTER – October 11, 2006 — IN 1994 the North Koreans expelled inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency and were threatening to process spent blah blah blah blah blah….

In January 2006, it was revealed that data had been fabricated in an article by the cancer researcher Jon Sudbø and 13 co-authors published in The Lancet in October 2005.

OK, so you consider their open support for terrorists, loony leader-worship, and single-minded pursuit of nuclear arms while their people starve to be rational?? No one ever said irrational regimes can’t be ‘weasely’.

Yes, six years. So what? Remember the Vietnam peace talks? The NVs deliberately delayed progress at every step. They even argued about the shape of the negotiating table!

Was there a reason for stretching the talks out? You bet there was. They wanted to give their allies in the US – the left, the media – every opportunity to gain strength and undermine national policy. Did it ever cross your mind that the NKs might have learned something from that?

This administration could have started talks with the NKs on January 20, 2001, and it would have done absolutely no good. The pattern’s predictable. They would delay for at least two reasons:

- Play for time while continuing to develop weapons grade material, and

- Take a page from the Vietnam playbook and hope their friends on the left take power.

Delaying until either of those two events would suit them just fine, thanks.

Finally, read your quote above. You’re talking about a binding framework. I challenge you to tell us exactly what makes you think the NKs would live up to any agreement, no matter how detailed. An agreement that’s binding on us but not on them is a fool’s errand. It’s a waste of time and only makes the world more dangerous.

No, sis, that’s not what you were saying. You were saying Carter was “lying” by not asserting the things you thought he should have. If you can show me where he asserted that North Korea was blameless, please show me.

ST: ROTFL! You guys are a trip. So someone has to outright SAY something before you can draw a conclusion one way or the other as to what their assertions are?? Have you ever heard of the term “guilty by omission”? Sheesh!

O.M. Fool: “Carter points out the positive effects of the dialog, but he also mentions NK’s efforts to obtain uranium, develop missle technology, etc. outside of the framework.

ST: Where in this piece did he mention that? This is where he talked about what happened after the agreed framework and before Bush’s speech:

Responding to an invitation from President Kim Il-sung of North Korea, and with the approval of President Bill Clinton, I went to Pyongyang and negotiated an agreement under which North Korea would cease its nuclear program at Yongbyon and permit inspectors from the atomic agency to return to the site to assure that the spent fuel was not reprocessed. It was also agreed that direct talks would be held between the two Koreas.

The spent fuel (estimated to be adequate for a half-dozen bombs) continued to be monitored, and extensive bilateral discussions were held. The United States assured the North Koreans that there would be no military threat to them, that it would supply fuel oil to replace the lost nuclear power and that it would help build two modern atomic power plants, with their fuel rods and operation to be monitored by international inspectors. The summit talks resulted in South Korean President Kim Dae-jung earning the 2000 Nobel Peace Prize for his successful efforts to ease tensions on the peninsula.

But beginning in 2002,

Please provide a direct quote that backs up your assertion.

O.M. Fool: “Your intended point, apparently, is that Carter is painting an overly sunny picture of the situation before 2002(”lying.”)”

ST: Yes, because that’s exactly what he was doing.

Follow up to my last post.
A picture says a thousand words.

Picture swiped from Sister Toldjah.

Technorati Tags Madeleine Albright, Kim Jong-il, North+Korea, appeasement, axis of evil