Extra, Extra
Around Town
Health Care Bill Heads To U.S. House Floor For Debate, Vote
Alleged Lottery Ticket Con Artists Charged
Is Sammy Sosa Turning White?
Jimmy Carter loves his mother so much he's written a book about her, the aptly titled A Remarkable Mother. And now, the soft-spoken former leader of the free world and Habitat for Humanity superstar is coming to Chicago to promote the book, giving you the chance for the perfect Mother's Day gift. Hey, the man really is a humanitarian.
Heated election years, conflict in the Middle East, soaring gas prices: Carter's seen it all before. His Presidential platform focused on human rights, stepping down America's imperialist approach to foreign policy, and made major strides on environmental issues (protecting over 50 million acres of Alaskan land using the American Antiquities Act of 1906) before it was hip. Regardless of your thoughts about his presidency, his post-Oval Office humanitarian career has been very admirable. Besides, it's not every day you get to meet a living ex-President.
Jimmy Carter book signing, Wednesday April 30, 7 p.m., Borders, 830 N. Michigan Ave., Call 312-573-0564 for more information
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
The macaroni necklace I made for my mom kicks this book's ass.
I stopped by this Borders yesterday evening, and there was already heightened security. Parts of the third floor were curtained off, and while I was looking at CDs near the roped-off area, I was approached by earpiece-wearing people in suits giving me the stink-eye THREE TIMES.
Damn, I just wanted to see if they had the new Nick Cave...
True Story:
I was in Washington D.C. with my Dad a few years ago and we randomly ran into Jimmy Carter. Being from ATL, my Dad freaked out and ran over and said to JIMMY CARTER:
"Mr. President, your eyes are as blue and as deep as the ocean".
Creep-tastic.
That being said, I love Jimmy Carter. I would like to ask, how many REPUBLICANS ex-Presidents have won the Nobel Peace Prize?
Only in America does the President lose his job over showing restraint and not bombing a Middle Eastern country back to the Stone Age (see: Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979-1980). W should have taken notes, but that would have been asking way too much.
If by "his post-Oval Office humanitarian career has been very admirable" you mean, 'writing books with flat out lies and distortions, and fulfilling a career goal to be a postman for Hamas', then yes it has been very admirable indeed.
Margaret, I am agreeing with mepps on this one.
Not the smartest thing to say.
writing books with flat out lies and distortions
citations please!
As if the Obama-worship by Chicagoist writers wasn't bad enough, we now have an article that praises Carters presidential and post-presidential career. Pathetic.
".....his post-Oval Office humanitarian career has been very admirable...."
Boy, that is a good one. This guy is a santimonious simpleton, an America-basher, a terrorist-sympathizer, and all-around jerk.
In other words, just perfect for Leftcagoist!
I meant Marcus. Whoops.
Hahahahaha!
(see: Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979-1980)
You mean when America was held hostage for 444 days by a group of dimwitted Iranian STUDENTS?! You really believe this was a high point in Carter's presidency?? What the hell are you reading?
@mepps:
"humanitarian career" means just that: his "humanitarian" work with the Carter Center, Habitat for Humanity, his organization, "The Elders", with Mandela, etc. That's all "humanitarian work" and not "book writing work" or "political diplomacy work."
also, while i stand by the "humanitarian career" statement, perhaps i misspoke in the iran hostage crisis comment. Never implied that was a high point at all. Just that I think Carter showed restraint in a lose-lose situation where others saw spineless bending to Iran's will.
"Boy, that is a good one. This guy is a santimonious simpleton, an America-basher, a terrorist-sympathizer, and all-around jerk."
What, you forget about Carter killing Jesus, too?
I'm no fan of Carter, but he hardly worse than Nixon or Reagan--and in some cases, even better (I don't count Ford's short term). He was, though, a very weak leader, and that is why he failed.
Carter started Habitat for Humanity which like, totally washes away the anti-semitism etc. One good deed!
It is like, Nader inventing seat belts makes up for 8 years of Bush.
Lives saved people.
In other words, just perfect for Leftcagoist!
He comes to insult us, but all we do is hug and hug. It's no wonder he keeps comin' back.
Tourist-
From Deborah Lipstadt's article- She sums up the problems pretty well.
"Carter has repeatedly fallen back -- possibly unconsciously -- on traditional anti-Semitic canards. In the Los Angeles Times last month, he declared it"politically suicide" for a politician to advocate a "balanced position" on the crisis. On Al-Jazeera TV, he dismissed the critique of his book by declaring that "most of the condemnations of my book came from Jewish-American organizations." Jeffrey Goldberg, who lambasted the book in The Post last month, writes for the New Yorker. Ethan Bronner, who in the New York Times called the book "a distortion," is the Times' deputy foreign editor. Slate's Michael Kinsley declared it "moronic." Dennis Ross, who was chief negotiator on the conflict in the administrations of George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, described the book as a rewriting and misrepresentation of history. Alan Dershowitz teaches at Harvard and Ken Stein at Emory. Both have criticized the book. Because of the book's inaccuracies and imbalance and Carter's subsequent behavior, 14 members of the Carter Center's Board of Councilors have resigned -- many in anguish because they so respect Carter's other work. All are Jews. Does that invalidate their criticism -- and mine -- or render us representatives of Jewish organizations?
Others can enumerate the many factual errors in this book. A man who has done much good and who wants to bring peace has not only failed to move the process forward but has given refuge to scoundrels."
Please visit frontpagemag.com and search "jimmy carter." Some of the articles on his exploits might surprise you. Hardly a "great humanitarian," in my opinion.
Marcus
Hardly a lose lose situation. Why do you think they were released the very day Reagan took office? The students knew consequences would be coming soon.
And, you have to consider his book writing and political bullshit part of his humanitarian attempts. His books and trips around the world are aimed at humanitarian efforts!! Why did he hug Hamas?- in the hopes of peace (that was even after everyone and their dog told him not to, but nooooo he want's a love buddy around the world). This guy is an shmuck.
@ mepps -
By the time they were released, the students had LONG since relinquished total control of the situation. The clerics and Ayatollah had stepped in by then. Several deals were nearly brokered during the captivity only to have the Iranians inexplicably back out or suddenly change their demands.
And the fact that Iran had run out of money and parts for military jets, weapons, etc. as the 8 Years War with Iraq had broken out had a lot to do with finally ending the captivity as well.
You do have a point in that Iran knew Reagan would be more aggressive, but the deal that released the hostages had been in the works for a while and the Inauguration Day release was a symbolic "F*** YOU!" from Iran to Carter.
I'm more interested in what he got wrong. The problem with Deborah Lipstadt's statement is that she's conflating perfectly reasonable criticism, which is the job of the press, with condemnations. I don't think of a bad review as a formal condemnation. I think of the ADL demanding an apology to a foreign state as a condemnation.
Did he write a crap book? Maybe. But your (and, more really, Ward's) anger seems out of proportion. Jonah Goldberg wrote a pretty dispicable book (you have to work very hard at getting things so wrong), but I'm able to share why he's wrong without turning into the Incredible Wardy Up. "Carter baaaaaaaad! Smash!"
Why do you think they were released the very day Reagan took office? The students knew consequences would be coming soon.
Huh. And here I thought it was because we exchanged weapons for the hostages...
(conservatives don't write history, so much as they re-write it)
Is it true Jimmy Carter once break danced 5 hours consecutively beginning in Vermont and ending his epic endurance in Nova Scotia? I believe this acted dually as his peace movement, and hub cap recycling rally and fundraiser. However it did get Egypt and Israel to finally hug...
@Marcus:
Maybe you should write a post about the Iranian Hostage crisis. As is, your comments are off topic.
I understand though, that your extraneous and unwelcome comments on your ouwn post, are probably the only thing that gets onto this site without The Queen editing for content and style. I understand this is the time when you can get let off your leash, so to speak.
But, I don't like it.
@wlgordon: You can't expect me to look to David Horowitz for honest reporting! I'm not that gullible.
Ok, regardless of who had control of the situation, the point remains there was a reason Carter couldn't get them home.
Also, why do you think so many deals fell through?? Same reasons.
It wasn't Carter telling them what to do, it was the Iranians telling Carter how it was going to happen- just playing games with him. They knew Reagan would come put a stop to all the bullshit.
Twisting the arm of the most powerful nation in the world would not get old even if you run out of money for military jets!
But yes, it may have been a symbolic gesture the day they were allowed to come home, a pretty good one at that.
Pinko- Are you kidding right now?
@Spav - Weren't you the one who lectured me: "As a "writer", don't you like that you can post something maybe even relatively innocuous and then the thread goes in such a different direction. Can't you just sit back an enjoy?"
As for my comments being "extraneous and unwelcome," and you not liking it, I really don't care.
@Marcus:
Detente.
Tourist-
Read what you want to, the point was not to show you a bad review of the book, but to summarize all the problems with the book, no that its' just bad, but that many people haven taken issue with the supposed 'facts' and issues he talks about. So much so that 14 advisors resigned because of it, 14!!!
I also heard that Jimmy Carter once spiked shockwave's drink at a presidential bash. Hey I'm a fan of "whatever happens behind closed doors", but... somewhere, someone has, in there possession, an audio tape of shockwave, and Jimmy Carter, well uh-hem behind closed doors. Its odd he decided to take advantage of the only decepticon equipped with a built in tape deck. I'm a little disappointed that Shockwave never filed legal action on this monster.
Pinko- What did you say about you being a revisionist historian?!?!?!
How does the saying go? 'If you can't tread water.....' Can you finish it for all of us?
Uh - HUGE edit on my part, it was soundwave... not that it matters much, but doesn't it?
I repeat - NOT Shockwave.
Pinko can't be serious. It has to be a joke.
Matilda, I highly doubt it
Spav - Theodore Roosevelt won the Nobel Peace Prize, and he was a Republican. I mean, that was 100 years ago, but, you know, they've got one in the win column!
'writing books with flat out lies and distortions, and fulfilling a career goal to be a postman for Hamas', then yes it has been very admirable indeed.
How are the benefits? They probably don't have to worry about too much rain, sleet or snow.
As for charges of "anti-semitism"
That's quite a nifty trick Israel policy apologists have there. Criticize the policy of a government (that we practically bankroll) and you must hate the Jooooooosss!!!!
Nobel Peace Prize? That's a measure of accomplishment? I don't think so.
Just look at who has won.
Carter, winning for basically being a traveling clown who gives credibility to murderers. Oh, and those Nobel people just love people who slam the U.S.
Gore, the master of bad science, for making a flawed movie loaded with errors, distortions, and just plain lies.
Arafat, for being a remorseless terrorist.
The Nobel Peace Prize ain't what it used to be.
Kissinger getting one was certainly a low point. Speaking of people promoting murderous policy.
winning for basically being a traveling clown
See, you've hit it on the head. He's a traveling clown. If you got out of the house more, you might have a shot. ;-)
Pinko- Are you kidding right now?
Fuck. Unfortunately, no. I just inherited a new boss this week, which is seriously cutting into my internet surfing time (i.e. Chicagoist), as I try to make a good impression. In my haste to rush through and read all the comments, I morphed the two events into one in my mind and spoke from my ass. I'm giving myself a "time out" now, and will be standing in the corner if anyone needs me...
Navin, you are right (no sarcasm). You won't hear me speaking out in support of Kissinger.
In fact, the prize going to Kissinger illustrates my point that the Nobel Peace Prize frequently goes to the wrong person.
">Some good background on the Iran hostage crisis
This article was published in The Atlantic a couple of years ago. It recounts in great detail, with admirable balance, the circumstances that led to an aborted military operation to recover the hostages.
Also,
"Gore, the master of bad science, for making a flawed movie loaded with errors, distortions, and just plain lies."
Is this to suggest there are movies without flaws? You set a pretty high bar for films. Some contestable assertions are almost impossible to avoid with any project that takes a specific stance on an issue, especially one where knowledge of underlying science is continuously evolving. That said, I haven't seen any broadly accepted arguments that there were any substantial or fundamental misstatements of the science. As for the "plain lies", citations? (Please no Steven Milloy links...)
Damn that link worked just fine in preview...
http://iran.theatlantic.com/interactive_article_page_1.html
@irony - That article was the basis for Bowden's book "Guests of the Ayatollah" which is an expansive look at the crisis and definitely worth a read. An excellent account from both the hostages and the hostage takers perspective.
No meeps.
What sums up the problems pretty well is that… any body who even disagrees with an Israeli
weather report is accused of being "Anti-Semitic"
And I'm sure that Jewish Professor Norman Finkelstein would agree with Carter’s brave truth telling as well as the fact that its not just ludicrous but DANGEROUS (for The World and Israel) to continue branding folks who are not afraid to question Israeli policy and its treatment of Arabs with the scarlet letter of Anti- Semitism!