1 posted on
05/20/2007 5:08:55 PM PDT by
SJackson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
To: SJackson
" . . . in my opinion, he also received the most votes in Florida," Carter continued There is absolutely no evidence to support this "opinion" by the worst President of the last 80 years.
2 posted on
05/20/2007 5:11:00 PM PDT by
Roberts
To: SJackson
"[Gore] received the most votes nationwide, and in my opinion, he also received the most votes in Florida," Does this cager mierda know that the President is not elected by popular vote? And does he also realize that the networks called the election for Gore while the polls were open in BOTH OF FLORIDA'S TIME ZONES? And is he also aware that the Florida Supreme Court was making up election law as it went, on - how did he say it - "highly partisan basis"?
What a hucking feadcase!
3 posted on
05/20/2007 5:14:30 PM PDT by
Christian4Bush
(Dennis Miller said it best “Liberals always feel your pain. Unless of course, they caused it.”)
To: SJackson
Jimmy is quite relevant. All the bad stuff started on his watch. Hey Jimmy! Remember the 444 days?
4 posted on
05/20/2007 5:21:57 PM PDT by
DogBarkTree
(The correct word isn't "immigrant" when what they are doing is "invading".)
To: SJackson
The White House has this all wrong.
Carter is and always has been irrelevant.
Bush is increasingly irrelevant.
5 posted on
05/20/2007 5:22:45 PM PDT by
SittinYonder
(Ic þæt gehate, þæt ic heonon nelle fleon fotes trym, ac wille furðor gan)
To: SJackson
I can’t wait to empty my bladder repeatedly on this asshats grave!
6 posted on
05/20/2007 5:23:18 PM PDT by
digger48
To: SJackson
Irrelevant irresponsible and irreverent peanut pooper farmer.
8 posted on
05/20/2007 5:27:16 PM PDT by
eleni121
(+ En Touto Nika! By this sign conquer! + Constantine the Great)
To: SJackson
"And the decision was made as you know by a 5-4 vote on a highly partisan basis by the U.S. Supreme Court, so I would say in 2000, there was a failure." Whereas if the SCOTUS vote was 5-4 "for Gore" (to delay a results announcement until yet another recount was complete - not to prevent a recount), Jimmuh would have declared it a success instead.
There is only one scenario in which peanut brain could be correct - if essentially every ballot with multiple votes that included Bush was assigned to someone other than Bush, and every ballot with multiple votes that included Gore was assigned to Gore. Ballot has Gore AND Nader or Bush or whoever marked? Vote goes to Gore. Ballot has Bush and Nader/Gore/etc marked? Vote goes to Nader/Gore/etc. If that is a logical scenario to Carter...wow. "Mental institution, Jimmah. Something you might want to think about."
9 posted on
05/20/2007 5:29:13 PM PDT by
M203M4
(http://www.gohunter08.com/)
To: ConfidentConservative; seekthetruth; starsandstrips; bannie; pax_et_bonum; cibco; MomofMarine; ...
Go Tony...
Not that Tony, but good for you.
11 posted on
05/20/2007 5:32:32 PM PDT by
dinasour
(Pajamahadeen, SnowFlake, and Eeevil Doer.)
To: SJackson
Carter was quoted as saying, "I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history." Pot, meet kettle.
12 posted on
05/20/2007 5:32:47 PM PDT by
lowbridge
("The mainstream media IS the Democratic Party." - Rush Limbaugh)
To: SJackson
. . . five years after the controversial 2000 presidential election, ex-President Jimmy Carter announced he was certain Al Gore actually defeated George W. Bush.Somebody hold this guy for psychological evaluation.
13 posted on
05/20/2007 5:36:20 PM PDT by
henbane
To: SJackson
Reuter’s had the nerve to report “Sunday’s sharp response marks a departure from the deference that sitting presidents traditionally have shown their predecessors.”.
So what about Carter’s and Clinton’s constant criticism of a sitting president?
15 posted on
05/20/2007 5:38:42 PM PDT by
willk
To: SJackson
That response is barely a spitball, and does not qualify as “firing back.”
To: SJackson
"There's no
doubt mind in my
mind doubt that Al Gore was elected president."
There -- fixed it.
18 posted on
05/20/2007 5:41:02 PM PDT by
RetiredSWO
((You have to have nuts to be squirrelly))
To: SJackson
Carter was just trying to shift the “Worst President in History” mantle to someone else. Too bad, Jimma, I think it’s yours for at least another hundred years or so.
To: SJackson
Carter gave us the current irredentist Iranian regime. He should be TOTALLY irrelevant.
To: SJackson
It’s been said before but it’s due to Jimmy Carter that we are stuck with the Middle East the way it is now.
The man is a complete putz without any character and no ethics.
Jimmy, be a man, if you can, and own up to your complete and utter foreign policy failures during your reign.
27 posted on
05/20/2007 5:56:59 PM PDT by
VeniVidiVici
(Say NO to an illegal amnesty!!!)
To: SJackson
"I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history." BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Just imagine, this from a President who, in the midst of a centuries long trend marking the global advance of democracy, oversaw the most extensive reversals of that trend of any modern President (excepting conquests lost but later regained in the world wars). A short list would have to include Afghanistan, Angola, Ethiopia, Mozambique, South Yemen, Libya, Syria, Aden, The Congo, Madagascar, The Seychelles, Nicaragua, and Grenada. And those were just the states where Soviet influence was secured or markedly avanced under Carter's watch. It doesn't even include states like Iran that went (more or less) independently rouge.
OTOH, you'd have to consider Carter a proven authority on being the WORST President in history.
28 posted on
05/20/2007 6:09:26 PM PDT by
Stultis
(I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
To: SJackson
Personally, I think this is being way too mean to all the “irrelevants” out there. Carter has to rise a bit to be called “irrelevant”.
29 posted on
05/20/2007 6:11:49 PM PDT by
ReleaseTheHounds
("You ask, 'What is our aim?' I can answer in one word: VICTORY - victory - at all costs...")
To: SJackson
How could Jimmah Carter become more irellevant? I think that would be impossible.
30 posted on
05/20/2007 6:17:21 PM PDT by
sig226
(Where did my tag line go?)
To: SJackson
Carter is as ugly a stain on the American presidency as he is on the human gene pool. It’s obvious that Billy got the brains, the common sense and the good looks in that family. Jimmy should follow Billy’s example.
31 posted on
05/20/2007 6:18:22 PM PDT by
GBA
(God Bless America!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson