Maybe that's gonna play in the Dems favor.  No matter how much of a bogeyman they try to paint Carter to be, his post-presidency work has been important and high-profile.  The man just won the Nobel Prize for heaven's sake. 

Jimmy Carter is a brilliant guy, but was not a terribly good president.  What beset his presidency is that his refusal to have any "Washington Insiders" did not help him to accomplish any strong legislative goals.  Since leaving the White House he's been a very good ex-president.  His Habitat for Humanity work has been commendable, but some of his more recent comments pertaining to the middle east and the State of Israel have made you shake your head sometimes though.

Carter? Remind me again, isn't he the one where the conspiracy theorists tell us that Reagan kept at him for failing to liberate the American hostages in Lebanon (?) while secretly he had a deal with the hostage takers NOT to release them until after the election?

Or do I have my conspiracy theories mixed up? 

Knut great post (it was Iran)

 Wow a Bush involved in underhanded dealings.Can you imagine that.

 Geoff here is one you can answer. Why do you identify as a republican? From everything you post, you come across as a liberal Democrat. That goes back to my question of , do we just become the party of our parents?

Republicans want to change the constitution to ban gays from marrying, that is an issue you seem very passionate about and yet you vote to support that party.  They also wanted to ammend the constitution to stop flag burning. For a party that seems to be pro American they sure seem to think that constitution is sure lacking. This isn't an attack, I just am surprised by your posts and the party you identify with.

Perhaps McCain is too old to realize that many voters don't even remember the Carter presidency? It ended nearly 28 years ago!

---
Maybe that's gonna play in the Dems favor.  No matter how much of a bogeyman they try to paint Carter to be, his post-presidency work has been important and high-profile.  The man just won the Nobel Prize for heaven's sake. 

I admit his term as president wasn't very good, but his later work (the work the youth will remember him for) has been very positive for the country.

Couldn't agree more.  He wasn't a good President but he is a great ambassador and humanitarian.

Knut,

Carter? Remind me again, isn't he the one where the conspiracy theorists tell us that Reagan kept at him for failing to liberate the American hostages in Lebanon (?) while secretly he had a deal with the hostage takers NOT to release them until after the election?

Or do I have my conspiracy theories mixed up? 

You have the facts right, but the countries and the dates a bit mixed up. Jimmy Carter was involved with the Iranian crisis, which ended right after Reagan took office. The Iranian government knew Carter was in a weak position politically, and when he lost the election, the Iranians refused to let the hostages go until after Carter was out of office on January 20, 1981. (After Reagan was sworn in and had given his speech, he was told the news, and in fact, invited Carter back up to the podium to make the announcement to the crowd at the ceremony.)

As for Reagan's administration having a deal with Iran, that was later(mid-80s, not during a Presidential election year), and that did involve selling arms to  Iranian rebels (not their government) in exchange for freeing six American hostages held by Lebanon, but by that time, Carter was not involved.

Geoff here is one you can answer. Why do you identify as a republican? From everything you post, you come across as a liberal Democrat. That goes back to my question of , do we just become the party of our parents?

That's why I'm a registered Democrat.  My parents (dad in a steel mill and mom a school teacher) were both registered Democrats so when I registered, that's what I selected.  I've never voted the party line.  Since 1980 I've voted Republican in three Presidential elections and Democrat in four.  With McCain taking the stance on drilling our own oil, where previously I was starting to waiver and consider Obama, it's put on a lock on making it a tie with 4 and 4.

They didn't wait because Jimmy Carter was weak, they just didn't have an under the table deals with him.

Bob do you remember the Iran/Contra scandal? 

Scott that is a good answer. I can completely understand why you are thinking McCain.  Now I am on the flip side because drilling for oil in the areas they are purposing is like putting a bandaid on a severed arm. Oil is not endless and Obama wants to pursue finding alternatives and become self suffcient with our energy needs without messing up the environment. 

When someone says I am anti abortion, no matter what, and not just for me for everyone. I can understand why they vote republican and respect their right to vote that way. I also am against abortion, I think it is killing a child, but I don't feel I should push my beliefs on someone else. I can't judge a woman who feels different, that is why I am a democrat. Democrats are not PRO abortion they are pro CHOICE. But I respect the republicans that believe differently and vote for their beliefs.

reminds me of one of my favorite quotes is "If you don't stand for something , you will fall for anything."

McCain taking the stance on drilling our own oil

And then GW pipes in with the same stance -- which immediately makes me suspicious.  Is this just another agenda item for Bush to push through for his oil buddies or is there something genuine behind it?

We don't KNOW how much oil may or may not be under the ocean, but we'd sure have to spend a lot of money finding out.

Even if an exploratory drilling measure were approved, how many years would go by before the consumer would reap whatever benefits there might be? 

Let's see some tax breaks for alternative fuel exploration.  Let's see some positive steps toward stopping out dependency on ANY oil, foreign or domestic.  Let's move on from slavery from black gold.