Score one for Juanny Mac:

“You know one of his (Obama’s) favorite phrases is that I would be a Bush third term. Well I think maybe his proposals could be a Carter second term,” McCain told Fox.

Heh.

Someone tell me again how this #sshat isn’t considered anti-American.  From Ed Morrissey (video clip in link):

Jimmy Carter appeared on the Tonight Show last night to offer his view on the upcoming credentials fight at the Democratic National Convention. The world-renowned election observer, who has argued for the legitimacy of Hamas, argued against the legitimacy of seating delegates from Florida and Michigan in Denver. He told Jay Leno that those voters had “disqualified themselves” by moving their primary dates ahead of the limitation of the DNC:

[video clip]

Who knew Steve Doocy had such passion in defending Democrats in Florida and Michigan? He makes a couple of decent points in this rant, especially ridiculing the notion that the voters disqualified themselves; those decisions got made by party leaders and state legislatures, and also by Howard Dean and the DNC. The national party botched this exercise in discipline by completely negating the impact of the two states. The RNC handled it appropriately by reducing their impact but still allowing the states to seat delegates and have some impact on the results.

Carter isn’t entirely wrong here, in that the parties had to take steps to punish states that broke the rules. However, the smug dismissal of American votes as illegitimate coming just after his insistence that a terrorist group should be recognized because it won an election provides a mind-bending irony that may just be too large to contemplate all at once. Maybe if Florida and Michigan voted to endorse Hamas, Carter’s opinion would change?

What a complete fool Carter is!  No wonder he dropped 44 states to Ronaldus Magnus in 1980.

Jimmah is as useless today as he was 30+ years ago.  From the AP:

Former President Jimmy Carter said Monday that Hamas — the Islamic militant group (the MSM just can’t bring themselves to say “terrorist”, can they? - Ed.) that has called for the destruction of Israel — is prepared to accept the right of the Jewish state to “live as a neighbor next door in peace.”

Carter relayed the message in a speech in Jerusalem after meeting last week with top Hamas leaders in Syria. It capped a nine-day visit to the Mideast aimed at breaking the deadlock between Israel and Hamas militants who rule the Gaza Strip.

Hamas leaders “said that they would accept a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders” and they would “accept the right of Israel to live as a neighbor next door in peace,” Carter said.

Wow…so the Peanut Putz got the terrorists to abandon their organization’s charter and recognize the right of Israel to exist?  What a miracle worker!  Um, except…

Carter said Hamas promised it wouldn’t undermine Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ efforts to reach a peace deal with Israel, as long as the Palestinian people approved it in a referendum. In such a scenario, he said Hamas would not oppose a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri in Gaza said Hamas’ readiness to put a peace deal to a referendum “does not mean that Hamas is going to accept the result of the referendum.”
…
“We accept a Palestinian state within the June 4 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital — a sovereign state without settlements — as well as the right of Palestinian refugees to return, but without recognition of Israel,” he said.

Terrorists ignore the will of the people, and they lie?  Gee…who knew?  Apparently, Carter didn’t.

Carter said that ‘The present strategy of excluding Hamas and excluding Syria is just not working”, and I just want to know this: virtually everything that man did in his four years of miserable leadership was an unmitigated failure, so what in the hell would he know about what works and what doesn’t?

He didn’t change Hamas’ minds a single bit.  They re-emphasized their commitment to slaughtering innocent Jews.  All Carter did was legitimize their horrific existence in the eyes of the world.  Even while he’s no longer president, Jimmy the Dhimmi is still making messes in the world that will take generations (if ever) to clean up.

Wow.  Just “wow”!  Straight from the peanut farmer’s mouth, via WSJ:

Former President Jimmy Carter has an interesting way of saying more than he intends. He lusts in his heart. He turns to his 13-year-old daughter for foreign policy wisdom (Now THAT explains a lot! - Ed.). He titles a book, “Palestine Peace Not Apartheid.” What Mr. Carter means to say is that he is a flesh-and-blood human being, a caring father, a missionary for peace. What he actually communicates is that he is weirdly libidinal, scarily naive and obsessively hostile to Israel.

Now the 2002 Nobel laureate is in reprise mode. “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels,” he said over the weekend, responding to a question from an Israeli journalist who noted that Mr. Carter had been snubbed by most of Israel’s top leadership and reprimanded by its president, Shimon Peres. “When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.”

This will further boost his anti-Semitic credentials. From FNC:

Former President Jimmy Carter is reportedly preparing an unprecedented meeting with the leader of Hamas, an organization that the U.S. government considers one of the leading terrorist threats in the world.

The Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Tuesday that Carter was planning a trip to Syria for mid-April, during which he would meet with Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of the Palestinian terror group Hamas, on April 18.

Deanna Congileo, Carter’s press secretary, confirmed in an e-mail to FOXNews.com that Carter will be in the Mideast in April. Pressed for comment, Congileo did not deny that the former president is considering visiting Meshal.

Exit observation: Jimmah endorsed Barry O last week, and since Barry O has an anti-Semitic military adviser prone to Zionist conspiracy theories, this is the last thing that Osamabama needed.

Not only does Jimmy the Dhimmi like to coddle evil maniacal dictators, he apparently would have preferred Satan to be coddled, too.  To think that this senile, egocentric buffoon was once the president!

From the American Spectator:

APPROPRIATELY ENOUGH, to Carter’s mind, the biggest trade-off of the Crucifixion may have been gaining eternal salvation while losing a potentially great bureaucratic overlord. During a meditation on the temptation of Christ, Carter muses over the attractiveness of Satan’s offer to allow Christ to rule the world if he rejected God:

What a wonderful and benevolent government Jesus could have set up. How exemplary justice would have been. Maybe there would have been Habitat projects all over Israel for anyone who needed a home. And the proud, the rich, and the powerful could not have dominated their fellow citizens…As a twentieth-century governor and president I would have had a perfect pattern to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, “This is what Jesus did 2000 years ago in government. Why don’t we do the same?”

That Carter assumes, first, he would be a worthy successor to Christ in political office — what, Jesus returns to implement…term limits? — and, second, that the Messiah would spend his post-presidency years doing precisely as Carter did — building Habitat for Humanity homes, apparently — tells you everything you need to know about the Man from Plains’ outlook on this world and the next. 

Go ahead, you Carter defenders: try your best with this one!

Jimmah likes his cats like he likes his Jews: dead.  Check out the letter (image and all) that he wrote to his sister-in-law after blasting her cat:

Lamentably, I killed your cat while trying just to sting it. It was crouched, as usual, under one of our bird feeders & I fired from some distance with bird shot. It may ease your grief somewhat to know that the cat was buried properly with a prayer & that I’ll be glad to get you another of your choice. 

What a dumb#ss!  Birdshot is meant to kill birds from a distance, not “sting” them.  The idiot thought that a shotgun would have little to no effect on a cat?  Did he watch too many episodes of Tom and Jerry where Tom would get shot in the butt with buckshot and just howl in pain, with Jimmah thinking “Hey, that gives me an idea on how to deal with that pesky cat outside!”?  Dude, get a freakin’ water gun or garden hose and soak the little bugger…no need to kill it!

Folks, this is a real glimpse into the sheer level of inherent boneheadedness inside Carter’s gourd.  That would certainly help to explain the lack of thought that chronically plagued his administration.

The film did about as well as Jimmy the Dhimmi Carter did during his 1980 campaign.  That is to say, it was a thumping of near historic proportions.  From Bryan:

Hollywood director Jonathan Demme seems to have too much money and too little sense. Demme, who directed The Silence of the Lambs and Swimming to Cambodia (no, that second one is not about John Kerry’s Rambo-like exploits and achievements in time travel, fighting under the illegal orders of a president who hadn’t taken office yet) bankrolled Jimmy Carter: The Man from Plains. It’s a documentary that follows the ex-president around as he tours to promote his book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.

On its first weekend, the film did a whopping 10 grand at the box office in 7 theatres. That works out to about $1500 per theater, not enough to cover a single screening fee.

How surprising. Who wouldn’t want to sit through two hours watching an old man dodge questions about plagiarism, his book’s extreme anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian bisa, his illogical equation of Israel with South African apartheid, and his repeat offenses of snuggling with anti-American tinpots? Who wouldn’t want to see the self-righteous man who helped usher in the Iranian mullahcracy hug his Nobel and chastise the president who is having to clean up the mess that Carter left for all of his successors?

How could Demme have misjudged the movie-going public so badly?

Well, he’ll always have public schools and universities sell The Man From Plains to. It’ll probably end up in double features with An Inconvenient Truth with a year. 

Despite the MSM’s spin to the contrary, the irrefutable fact is that Americans do not hold Carter in the same high regard as the left and the MSM (pardon the redundancy).

Allah nails Jimmah on this one.

And to think I was worried that that supergroup he formed with Mandela might not be helpful.

“There is a legal definition of genocide and Darfur does not meet that legal standard. The atrocities were horrible but I don’t think it qualifies to be called genocide,” he said. Washington is almost alone in branding the 4 1/2 years of violence in Darfur genocide. Khartoum rejects the term, European governments are reluctant to use it and a U.N.-appointed commission of inquiry found no genocide, but that some individuals may have acted with genocidal intent. Carter, whose charitable foundation, the Carter Center, worked to establish the International Criminal Court (ICC), said: “If you read the law textbooks … you’ll see very clearly that it’s not genocide and to call it genocide falsely just to exaggerate a horrible situation I don’t think it helps.

The point here isn’t that he think Darfur fails to qualify as a textbook case of genocide; other international bodies agree, although most prominent American politicians do not. The point is that he’s resorting to a textbook definition in the first place. If you’re dealing with murder on a scale so massive that it might arguably constitute genocide, by what insane logic is it preferable to err on the side of saying that it isn’t genocide and thereby eschew the tremendous moral force that comes with that term? If it’s genocide then thoughts turn to the Holocaust and the world is compelled to intervene. If it isn’t then it’s a civil war gone bad that’ll work itself out — eventually. Jimmeh likes the latter approach because it appeases the Sudanese government and, theoretically, makes them more amenable to negotiations. After they’ve already killed 200,000 people.

That’s one reason why using the textbook definition is offensive. There’s another reason, too: namely, that Carter hasn’t always been such a stickler for precision when applying that vaunted moral yardstick of his. If it’s so desperately “unhelpful” to go throwing around the concept of genocide even when it arguably applies, explain this. 

The last link above shows where Peanuthead says that Israel is doing much worse than what’s happening in Darfur.  But no, Jimmah isn’t an anti-Semite who coddles dictators and mass murderers while poormouthing his own country!  Why would anyone think otherwise?  For those of you on the left, the prior two sentences were sarcasm.

From al-Reuters:

Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro is tipping Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to team up and win the U.S. presidential election.

Clinton leads Obama in the race to be the Democratic nominee for the November 2008 election, and Castro said they would make a winning combination.

“The word today (from whom? - Ed.) is that an apparently unbeatable ticket could be Hillary for president and Obama as her running mate,” he wrote in an editorial column on U.S. presidents published on Tuesday by Cuba’s Communist Party newspaper, Granma.

Who’s your buddy, Fidel?

Castro said former President Bill Clinton was “really kind” when he bumped into him and the two men shook hands at a U.N. summit meeting in 2000. He also praised Clinton for sending elite police to “rescue” shipwrecked Cuban boy Elian Gonzalez from the home of his Miami relatives in 2000 to end an international custody battle.
…
He said his favorite U.S. president since 1959 was Jimmy Carter, another Democrat, because he was not an “accomplice” to efforts to violently overthrow the Cuban government.

The commie dictator just loves him some Democrats, doesn’t he?

Whenever I mention that Jimmah Carter never met a dictator he didn’t like, the left gets angrier than Ted Kennedy at the bottom of a Dewar’s bottle. It can be denied no longer. From Jammie Wearing Fool:

Here’s a shocker.

Presidential disaster Jimmy Carter agreed to have the U.S. underwrite the communist takeover/redistribution of property in Zimbabwe in 1980.

Of course, the communists at the Beeb call it land reform.

US backed Zimbabwe land reform

The key role played by the United States ahead of Zimbabwe’s independence in resolving the sticky point of land redistribution has just come to light.

The land issue has always been emotive in Zimbabwe — as can be seen with the current crisis sparked off by the government seizure of mainly white-owned farms in 2000.

Cutting to the chase, Mugabe and his revolutionaries took property away from white owners and gave it to his buddies. During the negotiations of all this with the British government, who wanted to get out of that mess, they needed a sucker to write some checks to make it all happen.

Enter Carter.

“He secretly contacted the US ambassador in London, Kingham Brewster, and asked him to get the then US President, Jimmy Carter, to promise money to pay white farmers for their land.

Mr Mugabe was angered when the UK stopped land payments.

“Brewster was totally supportive. We were at a stage where Mugabe and Nkomo were packing their bags,” he explains.

“He came back to me within 24 hours. They had got hold of Jimmy Carter and Carter authorised Brewster to say to me that the United States would contribute a substantial amount for a process of land redistribution and they would undertake to encourage the British government to give similar assurances.”

To put this in perspective, the U.S. was in the middle of a major recession at that point, and Carter agreed to help underwrite the Communist takeover of property in another country.

So how did that work out?

“But the UK government found that some of the farms were being given to President Mugabe’s close associates, and refused to continue the payments.

Mr Mugabe was furious, claiming bad faith.

The path to the seizure of white farms was opened and thus began the long slide to today’s economic chaos.”

Today, as a direct result of Carter’s contributions to the effort, Zimbabwe is falling apart. They have approximately 5,000% annual inflation, life expectancies in the 34- to 37-year range, and thousands hungry and leaving every day.

And today the left sees Carter as some kind of hero.

Actually, the inflation rate is more like 7,600%, but why quibble over a couple thou when it comes to hellishly high inflation? You get the picture.

Did this schmuck get anything right?

Via Newsbusters:

Former President Jimmy Carter has gotten himself into more hot water, although it seems quite unlikely that any in the media will pay much attention to this recent faux pas (h/t LGF).

In a seemingly absurd response to a call by The Simon Wiesenthal Center for members and supporters to send letters to Carter concerning his book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” the former president penned a handwritten note to the organization’s well-respected founder and Dean.

In it, Carter suggested that the Center lied about him and his book in order to raise money.

Think I’m kidding? Well, put this in your Middle East peace pipe and smoke it:

1/26/07
To Rabbi Marvin Hier

I don’t believe that Simon Wiesenthal would have resorted to falsehood and slander to raise funds.

Sincerely,
Jimmy Carter

In reality, there was absolutely nothing in the Center’s news release concerning Carter’s book asking for money. And, there was nothing disrespectful about the letter the Center was encouraging recipients to send to the former president:

Dear President Carter:

We respect your historic achievement in forging peace between Egypt and Israel in 1979 which only deepens our disappointment and concern over your one-sided book, “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.”

President Carter there is no Israeli Apartheid policy and you know it. I join with the Simon Wiesenthal Center in respectfully reminding you that the only reason there is no peace in the Holy Land is because of Palestinian terrorism and fanaticism.

In 2000, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak went to Camp David and offered Yasser Arafat 95% of the West Bank, 100% of Gaza and part of the Old City of Jerusalem, along with $30 billion in compensation for Palestinian refugees. Arafat’s response was the launching of the bloody Intifada which targeted innocent civilians in restaurants, malls, schools, and religious services with suicide terror attacks. Had Arafat accepted Israel’s offer at Camp David there would have long been a Palestinian State alongside Israel.

Mr. President, when the Palestinian people repudiate their fanatics in favor of a course of moderation, then there will be peace in the Middle East.

Pretty innocuous letter to elicit such a response from a former president, wouldn’t you agree?

Nothing in the letter to indicate that the Jewish center was asking for money? Why, if I didn’t know any better, I’d swear that Jimmy the Dhimmi was insinuating that Jews are obsessed with money! Nah, that couldn’t be the case! I mean, that would be stereotyping, and we all know how Carter has no history of anti-Semitic thought or behavior, don’t we? It’s not like he and Wesley “Call them ‘New York Money People’ and not ‘Jews’” Clark have a habit of poormouthing Jews, right?

By the way, with the exception of an AP story on Tuesday, the MSM was quieter than Hillary’s bedroom. Nope…no liberal media bias!

Jimmah with his usual “deer in headlights” look

Just when you think that Jimmy “the Dhimmi” Carter’s anti-Semitism knew no bounds, he exceeds those bounds even further. From the Israel Insider:

The more we learn about Jimmy Carter’s one-sided and biased views towards Israel and her supporters in this country, the more reason we have to be deeply troubled by what he represents and the dangerous mischief he continues to foment.

There is not enough space to repeat the detailed and well documented critiques of his best selling book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. They are, however, aptly summarized by Dr. Kenneth Stein, one of the many former aides and colleagues publicly to have disassociated themselves from the former president, who charged that: “[the book] is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments.”

One of the book’s most egregious - and now infamous passages — is found at page 213, where Carter advises “the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups” to make clear that “suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism” will end once when Israel accepts the ultimate goals of the “Roadmap.” Thus the former president sanctions — indeed encourages — continued suicide bombings until Israel meets Arab demands. In fact, what seems to trouble him most about such Arab acts is not that they kill innocent Israeli civilians, but that they may damage sympathy for the Palestinian cause.

Despite the in depth criticism of his thesis, Carter has dug in, stubbornly insisting that his book is both “accurate and needed,” blaming the firestorm he has triggered on Jewish American organizations and while he accuses the pro-Israel community of trying to stifle him or any debate on Middle East policy.

And, let’s not ignore his interview on the Al Jazeera network during which he astonishingly proclaimed that Palestinian missile attacks against Israeli citizens do not, to his way of thinking, constitute acts of terror. Even his apparent condemnation of the killing of children and bombing buses is problematic, as it is couched in terms of damaging sympathy for the Palestinian cause. This approach is reminiscent of that employed by Arafat who, to the extent he ever was in any way critical of acts of terror, complained only because he thought it was tactically disadvantageous.

Not surprisingly and very tellingly, Carter’s frontal attacks have been warmly embraced by a nasty cast of scoundrels, including white supremacists groups and websites such as Stormfront and Aryan Nations as well as David Duke and the notorious Holocaust denying Institute of Historical Review.

It is with good reason that Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi, John Conyers and Howard Dean have publicly distanced themselves from Mr. Carter, a lead which hopefully others will follow. No Democratic leader or official has come to Carter’s defense, and partisan attempts to use his comments to smear all Democrats as anti-Israel and anti-Semitic should not be tolerated.

The ongoing controversy, including the Carter Center’s acceptance of millions of dollars from anti-Israel Arab sources, including the Saudi royal family, and the Bin Laden family prompted me last month to reveal to the JTA a disturbing 1987 encounter I had with Mr. Carter, while I was the Director of the Office of Special Investigations in the Justice Department, as he took up the cause of the family of an admitted Nazi SS concentration camp who had been stripped of citizenship by a federal court and removed from the country. (Read about it here.)

If one didn’t know better, you’d think that we were not talking about a former president, but rather Pat Buchanan. After all, it was Mr. Buchanan, was it not, who over the years: denigrated Israel by calling it, among other things, an albatross around this country’s neck, as he blamed her for the wars in Iraq; demeaned the pro-Israel lobby for having turned Capitol Hill into what he calls “Israeli occupied territory”; and came to the aid of Nazi criminals being pursued by our government, even while serving as communications director in the Reagan White House.

As troubling as all of this is, there is more. I have received correspondence which ineluctably leads to the comparison of Jimmy Carter to the darkest side of Richard Nixon.

In response to my earlier Op Ed, on December 27 of last year I received an email from Professor Monroe Freedman, a distinguished member of the faculty of Hofstra Law School in New York. He had been the first executive director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, which had been created during the Carter administration. Working closely with Elie Wiesel, Freedman put forward to the White House a list of Council members. The recommendations came back disapproved, and Freedman remembers well the reason: “In the top corner, in Carter’s handwriting and with his initials was the notation: ‘Too many Jews’.”

It certainly looks like Mr. Carter took a page right out of the playbook of the disgraced Nixon, who, in a most paranoid and bigoted of moments, instructed an aide to count the Jews in the Labor Department where he believed his economic policies were being obstructed.

To all those who doubt that Jews are an extraordinary people or that Israel is an extraordinary nation, I ask: who else could bring together and find common cause between the likes of Richard Nixon, Pat Buchanan David Duke and Jimmy Carter? Enough said.

In related news, Jimmah also complains that maternity wards have “too many babies being born”, high school proms have “too many teenage kids dancing”, zoos have “too many animals”, schools have “too much learning going on”, doctors’ offices have “too many sick people”, and Code Pink rallies have “too many moonbats”! OK, that’s a bit of a stretch…he’d never think there’s a such thing as too many moonbats!