Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

What Was Wrong With Carter's Words

An overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward Israel is based on the fact that it is a Jewish state. I think it's bubbled up to the surface, because of a belief among many non-Jews, not just in the United States but around the world, that Jews are despicable and a Jewish state is inherently illegitimate. I think it's based on anti-Semitism. There is an inherent feeling among many that the Jews should get out of Palestine.

Actually, I do not believe this. I’m altering former president Jimmy Carter’s own words -- substituting "Jews" and "Israel" for "blacks" or "African Americans," and "anti-Semitism" for "racism" -- to illustrate what was both true about his statement blaming white prejudice for the most intense opposition to President Obama, and what was so irresponsibly wrong about it.

I know people who do believe that all critics of Israel -- Carter included -- are anti-Semites. After all, he has supported talks with a sectarian Islamic terrorist movement, Hamas, while branding the Jewish state with the inflammatory term “apartheid.” He is an evangelical Christian from what was historically the most anti-Semitic region of the country. (Though, it has, to use another of his phrases, “come a long way.”) They lynched Leo Frank in Georgia, didn’t they? Case closed.

The truth, of course, is far more complicated. Some of Israel’s critics are indeed motivated by Jew-hatred. At least in the United States, however, this is a pretty small minority. For the most part, those who take issue with Israel’s conduct do so in good faith.

To be sure, this is not an either-or proposition. No one can look in the hearts and minds of those who decry Israeli human rights abuses to determine whether they speak from the same outrage that they would feel toward, say, mass rape in the Congo -- and how much reflects a biased or insensitive singling out of Israel. As it happens, I don’t think Carter hates Jews. I think he goes after Israel partly because of genuine -- if, in my view, one-sided and hyperbolic -- concern, and partly because it’s a fashionable cause in certain circles whose attention and approval he craves.

By the same token, I would never absolve every single Obama critic of racism, basically for the reasons Carter suggests. I would even add that Obama probably gets extra hostility in some quarters based on his “foreign”-sounding name and his father’s Muslim background. But just as a reasonable person could find fault with Israel in the Middle East, so can a reasonable person find fault with the policies President Obama is pursuing in the White House. And just as I have no idea what percentage of Carter’s incessant condemnation of Israel is malicious or not, he has no basis for determining that “there is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African American should not be president.”

That slippery word, “many,” like its companion in inexactitude, “overwhelming portion,” does a lot of work in the former president’s formulation -- it sounds ominous, but, taken literally, could mean anything from a sizeable minority to almost all whites. There are data on this question. According to a 2007 Gallup Poll, 94 percent of those surveyed said they would vote for a black presidential candidate of their party, whereas only 88 percent would vote for a woman (like Obama's opponent at the time, Hillary Clinton), and 57 percent would vote for someone who, like John McCain, was 72 years old. Obama did not poll a majority of the white vote for president, but that’s been true for Democratic candidates (Carter included) for decades. With 43 percent of the white vote in 2008, Obama did slightly better than John Kerry in 2004. If an inveterate white belief that an African American should not be president explains today’s public mood -- as opposed to, say, the unemployment rate or the budget deficit -- how come 57 percent of whites approved of Obama’s job performance as recently as the 100-day mark of his presidency, according to the Gallup Poll?

Do the people who marched on Washington to protest Obama hate him more than they hate Hillary Clinton, to say nothing of how much they hated her husband while he was president? If Clarence Thomas were president today, the crowd probably would have stayed home watching Fox News’s laudatory coverage of the Thomas administration. And Carter might have been manning the barricades instead.

Again, I am not saying race has nothing to do with any of the hostility Obama is facing. What I am saying is that it is far from the whole story or even most of it. When the political temperature rises, it would be nice if we could turn to our elder statesmen and stateswomen for a cooling dose of wisdom and perspective. What we got from Jimmy Carter was more gasoline on the fire.

By Charles Lane  | September 16, 2009; 5:02 PM ET
Categories:  Lane  | Tags:  Charles Lane  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Joe Wilson Proves He Deserves His Reprimand
Next: Tax Sugary Drinks?


With Carter, I, ... would say that He sometimes 'backs himself into a corner'. He, like me, have witnessed some violence in our time, but nothing like incoming missiles from extreme 'fundamentalists. I'm not so sure that I can ever fully understand a nation, any nation, that does not have some semblance of separation of church from state. I've been somewhat shielded by this concept from more intense 'differences' of opinion that Israeli's are subject to.
... In our larger, more forgiving national boundary, we've been able to get some distance from various social encounters. There's plenty of room for all, so to speak.
... I also think that Carter was referring more to 'embers' than outright 'flames'.
... As you can see, He didn't really even need any petrol, or gasoline.
... So now we're all running around with fire extinguishers, diplomatic-wise.

Posted by: deepthroat21 | September 16, 2009 5:36 PM | Report abuse

At least two studies beg to differ. From the "new antisemitism" entry on Wikipedia:

A study entitled "Modern Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israeli Attitudes", published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in 2009, argues that "those claiming that there is no connection between antisemitism and hostility toward Israel are wrong."[60] The authors of this study argue that there is "sometimes a link between anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment", and that "hostility toward Israel may serve as cover for anti-Semitism and, at the same time, feed back and strengthen anti-Semitism."[61]

A 2006 study in the Journal of Conflict Resolution argued that although almost no respondents in countries of the European Union regarded themselves as antisemitic, antisemitic attitudes correlated with anti-Israel opinions.[62] Looking at populations in 10 European countries, Small and Kaplan surveyed 5,000 respondents, asking them about Israeli actions and classical anti-Semitic stereotypes. "There were questions about whether the IDF purposely targets children, whether Israel poisons the Palestinians' water supply - these sorts of extreme mythologies," Small says. "The people who believed the anti-Israel mythologies also tended to believe that Jews are not honest in business, have dual loyalties, control government and the economy, and the like," Small says. According to this study, anti-Israel respondents were 56% more likely to be anti-Semitic than the average European. "This is extraordinary. It's off the charts." says Small.

Posted by: PaulinMaryland | September 16, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Look at Jimmy Carters White House and Cabinet???? Is Jimmy Carter a racist???

Most southern white democrats were!!!!!!

Posted by: jjcrocket2 | September 16, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Good column...I had not thought of it quite this way. By the way, Jimmy Carter has always been one of my favorite people...a good man.

Posted by: cincobayou | September 16, 2009 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Look at Jimmy Carters White House and Cabinet???? Is Jimmy Carter a racist???

Most southern white democrats were!!!!!!


and then they became republicans in the 60's and 70's and 80's..

reagan, leader of the "Southern Revival"

Posted by: newagent99 | September 16, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

"Jimmy Carter has always been one of my favorite people...a good man."

The man is a disgrace to the office he once held. He never meet a dictator, terrorist or American hater he did not love.

Posted by: bnichols6 | September 16, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

The only thing I DO agree with Carter on is his even handed approach to the Palastinian situation. Israel has stolen land from these people and refuses to halt its settlement expansions. Israel leads the US around by the nose despite our giving them billions upon billions in aid.

Posted by: rpcurt1 | September 16, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

If you think it's hard to defend Carter's words, try defending the assertion that the opposition to President Obama has nothing to do with racism. A point you basically concede. So what's in dispute? How much of it's based on racism? Not an incredibly interesting or useful debate, but if that's how you occupy your time, don't let me stop you.

Posted by: jpk1 | September 16, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

i think that jimmy carter loves this country and is speaking his mind from what his heart has to say. what does he have to lose at this point in his life? im not so sure about the israeli anti-semitic connection, but for me, i don't like what they have been doin in the middle east. for a people that have been threw so much to turn around and do it to another people, maybe even worse for the time this has been going on, just irks me.

Posted by: whatdyousay | September 16, 2009 6:48 PM | Report abuse

There were no racists in the recent Washington D.C. demonstrations against Obama.
There are no racists in congress especially
Joe Wilson.
There are no racists posting here.
Racism in America disappeared when Obama became president.

If only it were true. We wouldn't be posting here about this topic now.

Posted by: seemstome | September 16, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Re: Carter/Anti-Semitism/non-Jews

Is "race" a factor in Carter's mind? With his origins it would be difficult to escape, though I am certain he tries. Prejudices in my mind slip out, though I try to contain them.

Palestinians are Semitic. The term first appeared in the late 1800s to replace a less friendly one, der Judenhaß, Jew Hate. Wilhelm Marr posited that a term based on classical languages would be more easily applied. He diminished the German term for hate, der Haß to "anti," and broadened the word for Jews, Juden, to Semites. It succeeded, as euphemisms often do.

We have travelled a distance since Plessy vs. Ferguson, though I am not sure the trip is yet complete. In that US Supreme Court decision it was declared that Plessy, 1/8 Black, was Black. Our rules have improved, Obama is half African American and half Caucasian American. That does not today automatically decide his association, he does. There are people who decline to self assign any "category," I am among them.

Hitler's words were "non-Aryan." Much Holocaust literature repeats his descriptor as "Jews and non- Jews." Nor is it uncommon in journalism. I do not consider my self a non-Jew, a non-Catholic, a non-whatever, definition by negative observation. I find the phrase offensive.

Harold A. Maio, retired Mental Health Editor

Posted by: khmaio | September 16, 2009 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Jimmy Carter, the worst President since Richard Nixon expresses his 1st Amendment Rights and has his say.....

Posted by: DL13 | September 16, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

I'm a conservative and have voted Republican for 38 years. The one good thing I had hoped for with Obama's election was that it would put racial discord to rest. I was wrong, it has been heightened and largely by the Left. Me-personally, I'm sick to death of it.

Posted by: thebink | September 16, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

"Many" would mean about seventy thousand in a country of three hundred million or about two point three per cent. But that would be on the low side don't you think? What percentage of the American population is white racist?

Posted by: seemstome | September 16, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

I will be dating myself, but J. Carter was the first president that I ever voted for, and I have been ashamed of that fact ever since. He has become more delusional over the years.

I often rant against obama and his administration because of his agenda, and NEVER because he is black.
His color is of no concern to me, but I will fight for my beliefs and will raise questions about obama's policies and methods of governing.
That is every person's right in this great country.

Posted by: spiris333 | September 16, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

This is utter nonsense. After going around and around, you come up with about the same formulation as President Carter.
"By the same token, I would never absolve every single Obama critic of racism, basically for the reasons Carter suggests."
Wasn't that the point Carter was making?

I don't see anywhere in his comments that he thinks ALL critics of Obama (and there are some on the left) are racist. I get the feeling these days that people like you (opinion writers) just can't help it but write such dribble, because you don't want to spend the time to do the required research and write pieces that would be useful to readers, so you come us with such circula nonsense.

Posted by: ZnanaB | September 16, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

How anyone can call President Carter the worse president after barely surviving the last 8 years under Dumbya is beyond me. Thousands of Americans killed by terrorists and in made up wars under Bush along with taking us into another depression. These white folks are letting their ignorant bias make them another minute...they will tell you a B rate actor but a AAA rated bigot, St Raygun, was a good president. LMAO

Posted by: quavaduff | September 16, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Carter has had and does have a tendency to play the devil's advocate or walk a mile in someone else's shoes. I don't quite see what you're alluding to, exactly. My own observations of him are not of someone who can be termed a 'hater'. At least not on the large issues. ... Does he sometimes get backed into a corner? ... Yeah. Most 'philosophical' types often do. But then, he's not alone either on the world stage.

Posted by: deepthroat21 | September 16, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

I am worried that former President Carter comments could result in violence against those who dare challenge Obama's policies via open demonstrations. By Carter branding these law abiding citizens racists he has provided cover for groups like the Black Panthers, CRIPS, Unions, and left wing extremist groups to assault them at will. Left wing media organizations will merely state that an African-American group assaulted a group of anti-Obama racists. Carter's irresponsible comments may result in the serious injury or death of law abiding Americans who just don't want socialized healthcare.

Posted by: quillerm | September 16, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Carter needs to take his peanut brain and go back and play with the muslims in the middle east.

Posted by: JWx2 | September 16, 2009 7:36 PM | Report abuse

President Carer was mostly right. I do not concur that the majority of the tea bagger types are racist but there is certainly a large element of them that are period. The vile racist attitude flames are provided oxygen by the windbags like Rush, O'Reilly, and Glen Beck. They want our first mixed race President to fail. I on the other hand along with I am certain the majority of our citizens white, latino, african american want him and us to succeed. Godspeed Mr. President in all your future endeavors on our behalf. Obamanos!

Posted by: jbento | September 16, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for you opinion, now please sit down. You use stereotypes as much as the KKK and NAACP. The issues that brought people to demonstrate in D.C. last week had nothing to do with race. Blacks make up a little over 10% of the U.S. population so of course any might go unnoticed amongst a biracial crowd and anybody in the crowd who didn't have a foreign sounding name probably had red skin also. Obama's bailout of banks and AIG was of little benefit to Blacks, yet most Whites disagreed with the policy anyway. Few Blacks as a percentage of the total U.S. population will benefit from health-care reform, yet most Whites disagree with the policies that the President finds acceptable. I also doubt that many of those Whites who protest the President giving up on Government provided Health-care insurance are regular watchers of Fox news. It doesn't, either, take a racist to recognize when the President lies about Health-care legislation that is posted on the internet. I am adamantly opposed to just about everything Obama has done in his months of office. I recognize and respect that he is our President, and do have hope that he might do some of the other things he promised. I believe the vast majority of Americans can disagree without being disagreeable, or hating the opposition. That you assume such feelings makes it apparent that you wouldn't include yourself in that vast majority.

Posted by: rpatoh | September 16, 2009 8:04 PM | Report abuse

"Do the people who marched on Washington to protest Obama hate him more than they hate Hillary Clinton, to say nothing of how much they hated her husband while he was president?"

You just don't get it.... It isn't the messenger, it's the message. The common thread between Carter, Clinton(s), and Obama is that they are all selling the same things. They want more control, more government, and their own version of Utopia. If more of their constituents were less dependent on the largess of the government and more dependent on their own works, we'd all be better off. Scale down the biggest drain on the economy, the government. Have them protect us, but not coddle us.

It is amazing that the progressive movement always seems to believe that their message can't be wrong, but we just hate "them".

Such silly people, viewing the world through their own prejudices.....

Posted by: Spitfires | September 16, 2009 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to Jimmy Carter for spelling out the Democrat's position on criticizing Obama's policies. The Democrat party has now acknowledged that any criticism of Obama's policies by any non African-American is racist. Carter, however, forgot to include racist remarks by his fellow Democrats. Here are just a few examples of those remarks:

"The Confederate Memorial has had a special place in my life for many years. . . . There were many, many times that I found myself drawn to this deeply inspiring memorial, to contemplate the sacrifices of others, several of whom were my ancestors, whose enormous suffering and collective gallantry are to this day still misunderstood by most Americans."
--James Webb, 1990
Now a Democratic Senator from Virginia

"Everybody likes to go to Geneva. I used to do it for the Law of the Sea conferences and you'd find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva."
--Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D., S.C.) 1993
Chairman, Commerce Committee, 1987-95 and 2001-03
Candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 1984

"I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia [Sen. Robert C. Byrd, a former Ku Klux Klan recruiter] that he would have been a great senator at any moment. . . . He would have been right during the great conflict of civil war in this nation."
--Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), 2004
Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
Candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 2008

"You cannot go into a Dunkin' Donuts or a 7-Eleven unless you have a slight Indian accent."
"My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth largest black population in the country. My state is anything [but] a Northeastern liberal state."
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African American [Barack Obama] who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice looking guy."

"There's less than 1% of the population of Iowa that is African American. There is probably less than 4% or 5% that is, are minorities. What is it in Washington? So look, it goes back to what you start off with, what you're dealing with."
Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., (D., Del.), 2006-07

"In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."
Governor George Wallace, (D., Alabama), 1963

Posted by: Dodgers1 | September 16, 2009 8:13 PM | Report abuse

Racism???? America became a less racist country when President Obama was elected and President popular in the begining. Now that President Obama's polls are dropping American are once again a racist country? I guess those people that voted President Obama in and supported him in the begining, just noticed that President Obama is black

Posted by: Jenn38 | September 16, 2009 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Carter is probably right in saying that there are many racist whites who oppose Obama on the grounds that he is black, just like Obama was right to say that when the jobs went away that people clinged to their religion and guns. Carter has always been a little sanctimonious and never hesitated to give an opinion that indicated he thought himself a little smarter than the average person. Obama has been very good not to adopt that kind of persona as a role model. And despite occasional slip-ups like with the Gates arrest, Obama's comments are generally thoughtful and moderate- as a President's utterances should be. Carter needs to put that kind of a filter on his mouth also, but he never did that even when he was President, so this is just the way the guy is going to be. In so far as Carter's comments on Israel, they are generally- as the British say- "spot on", but he's so eager to try to get Hamas into the peace process that he fails to put the Hamas violence into its proper perspective along with the Israeli violence that he so regularly denounces.

Posted by: ripvanwinkleincollege | September 16, 2009 8:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm a 74yr. old white male. I spent much of the 60's & 70's as a dissident and demonstator from Alabama to Chicago. The bigotry and racism so overtly visible then is just as covertly displayed today.I'm certain if Obama could be a "fly on the wall",at virtually any gathering of white males(especially if alcohol is being served) he would hear the truth of Carter's words! How a man with such academic credentials remains so blind to the inbred nature of racism in America is truly a mystery--actually impossible! He should read(or re-read) Howard Zinn then hang his head in shame for playing politics.

Posted by: bob32 | September 16, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

You wonder why the White House Beer Garden Bust had to happen in the first place?

Are you so narrow minded that you can't see the wisdom in quadrupling the deficit in the first 9 months of an administration?

Do you wake up at night wondering how your kids are going to pay the debts of this generations selfish politicians?

Do you wonder why the government that can present precious little evidence of good business sense, is in the automobile business?

Are you angry that there was an attempt to push an enormous healthcare bill through Congress before anyone had a chance to read it?

Are you so self absorbed that you would dare to stand up at a healthcare townhall meeting and demand answers, even if your representative is on the cell phone?

Do you have mafia tendencies, standing in front of the White House with a sign and chanting like a dangerous mobster?

At tax time, does it make you mad that the guy who holds your feet to the fire to ensure you pay taxes, is a tax cheat himself?

And are you so dense that you can't find in the Constitution, the job descriptions for 33 Czars?

Well, my friend you must be a racist. But there is some good news. A majority of America must be racist right along with you!

Posted by: donchew1 | September 16, 2009 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Why do people keep calling him black? He is just as much white, if not more so.
Raised by his white mother and grandmother. Ivy leauge education at white majority Harvard and Columbia...

So who is the racist in this story? It's no wonder even Obama doesn't agree with Carter.
Plus Carter is getting very old-likely has dementia. Wonder if he knows his own name anymore...

Posted by: UnitedStatesofAmerica | September 16, 2009 8:49 PM | Report abuse

What do you call a non-racist Republican?

Blind, Deaf & Mute.


What do you call a non-racist Republican?



What do you call a non-racist Republican?


Posted by: thecontributist | September 16, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse

You are not a Nobel Peace Laureate, or former Admiral, Governor, and President. Carter is, and he spoke his opinion from his own experience as a Southerner, and said as much. Now unless you believe he makes things up, you need to respect his opinion, as it surpasses yours in all regards.

I like the analogy you used, slide a defense of Zionist aggression in there with the psychology reversed, very sly of you. If you want to be productive, do please go after the, "you're an anti-Semite" ranting Zionist bulls.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | September 16, 2009 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Why is it that Republicans see the need to make rock stars our of criminals and miscreants?

They are adored on Faux News, drooled over on AM Radio, given platforms to expouse their disregard for the law and Constitution.

From G. Gordon Liddy, to Ollie North, to Karl Rove and Joe Wilson.

It seems to me that the party of personal responsibility celebrates the lack of personal responsibility.

Posted by: thecontributist | September 16, 2009 8:54 PM | Report abuse

You say, "And just as I have no idea what percentage of Carter’s incessant condemnation of Israel is malicious or not...."

You attempt to pigeonhole a man too big to be pigeonholed.

If you honestly digested Carter's criticisms of Israel you know:
1. His first point is that there is unnatural suppression of criticism of Israel. But you suggest he cease. Rather laughable request, isn't it?
2. Carter's critiques concern Israeli policy, but his clear interest is Israel's long-term security. So he should cease trying to bring long term peace to the area?
3. Carter's work is important, he is a unique figure on the international scene, once the world's most powerful man now an activist for social justice. He should cease?

Your cheap invocation of "incessant condemnation," and, "malice" shows you either can't write or are slanderer.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | September 16, 2009 9:30 PM | Report abuse

3 Questions:

1) What percentage of white voters voted for the black candidate in the last presidential election? Ans: 43%
2) What percentage of black voters voted for the white candidate in the last presidential election? Ans: 7%
3) Why are blacks so racist?

Posted by: johnhenry3 | September 16, 2009 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Carter did himself no favors by making his point. Being an elder statesman, he has no constituency he needs to indulge anyway. So he was free to take a courageous stand. There is still plenty of racism in America. We cannot afford to sweep it under the carpet any longer. Now is the time for brave American stalwarts to face this scourge directly.

Posted by: imback | September 16, 2009 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Carter was a moron before he was POTUS, while he was POTUS, and now, 30 years after, is an irrelevant old drunk.

Yes, he's a drunk ....I saw him knee walking drunk verbally acost a female bartender before his Secret Sevice Agents could more or less drag him out of the bar.

They (the SS) were literally laughing at him, he was such a pathetic jerk.

I am ashamed I voted for him, but I was young, and a Georgian.

He'll kiss any "A" to stay in democratic good graces, and say anything to get into the news.

Posted by: DecentMan | September 16, 2009 9:53 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Imarkex | September 16, 2009 10:05 PM | Report abuse

To be precise, Carter said that racism was the source of the strongest animosity toward President Obama--not the source of all disagreement.

If you are trembling, spitting, teeth-gnashing, hair-pulling mad about Obama being president, that suggests there may be more than policy differences behind your anger. To follow the author's analogy, if you beside yourself with rage at Israel, you may be an anti-semite.

Carter was right in that extreme vitriol is a sign of something, something more than deficits.

Posted by: writinron | September 16, 2009 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Jimmy Carter has been telling the naked truth about many things, like energy policy and human rights sinnce some 30 years ago, more recently and after mediating a lasting peace between Israel and Egypt, he has the credentials the courage and frontal honesty to point to the abuses suffered by the Palestinians at the hands of Israel.
At present, he is telling it like it is; it's about, not all white Americans, but about the large portion of the groups protesting against the black man in the white house. Hypocrisy aside, we must recognize that Carter is right on this one, as well.

Posted by: likovid | September 16, 2009 10:57 PM | Report abuse

I believe that Carter is essentially wrong on the Israeli/Palestinian question, but Carter was not born in the Middle East. He was born in Georgia in the Jim Crow Era, actually an era of white terrorism against any blacks who asserted themselves as citizens. Thus Carter knows whereof he speaks when it comes to racism. As a scholar who has studied race for 40 years, I believe Carter was essentially correct and should be listened to. About 20 percent, in my view, are racists, much higher in the Republican party and in the South. A fifth of a nation of, say, 200 million adults is a lot of people. If we go conservative and say it is only 5 or ten percent, it is highly significant. It is indeed the elephant in the room. This racism is, as Carter put it, "bubbling up" because a black man is president.

Posted by: DWSouthern | September 16, 2009 11:11 PM | Report abuse

I am from Georgia. I stood in line as a young, first time voter to vote against Jimmy Carter for President. Why? Because he was incompetent as Governor of Georgia.

He was a failure as President. Now, Carter is a bitter, resentful old man who has lost touch with reality. Too bad, but you can't believe anything he says.

Carter is also very anti-Israel. I cannot understand why. As a Christian, this is very offensive to me. Every Christian that I know is very pro-Israel. Ask
Benjamin Netanyahu; he will tell you this is true.

Carter could not be more wrong about the race issue. A growing majority of Americans now oppose Obama on various issues not because he is black, but because his policies are wrong, socialistic, unpopular and will bankrupt the country.

It's just that simple. It's not about race. It's about policy.

Posted by: AlfromGeorgia | September 16, 2009 11:17 PM | Report abuse

It would be absurd to suggest that all the opposition to Obama is driven by racism. There are huge numbers of non-racist conservatives. The midwest is crawling with them. The Army is another place where white conservatives get on fine with blacks.

It's equally absurd to suggest that none of the opposition to Obama is driven by racism.
It's a fact that Southern Republicans tend to be racist. How do we know that?

It's very simple. Republicans love to point out that the old-time segregationists of the South were mostly Democrats, and this is true. Until 1964 the South was a Democratic fortress ... and an openly racist society.

But why did the South turn Republican? Because a Democratic president gave voting rights to blacks. Johnson famously said as he put down the pen after signing Civil Rights: "We have lost the South for a generation."

The large number of Southerners who couldn't forgive LBJ's decision turned Republican. Those who could accept black rights stayed Democrat. This is basic US history.
Therefore, modern southern Republicans are those (or the heirs of those) who couldn't live with the Civil Rights Act.

That's how we know that Southern Republicans tend to be racist.

Posted by: JenDray | September 16, 2009 11:31 PM | Report abuse

It is a form of bigotry to make generalized pejorative statements about a group of people or region of the country, especially when the author of such statements has no personal knowledge of what he speaks. Since I have lived in Georgia for over 50 years, I can tell when someone makes an uninformed comment. You can spot them the minute they open their mouth.

For those of you (including the author of this article), who make stereotypical slurs and statements about the South and its good people, I would invite you to come to Georgia and spend a little time here. You will learn that things here are not the way you have been taught in school, read in the paper, seen on liberal TV news shows or heard on liberal talk radio. You just don't know what you are talking about and it shows.

Come and attend a Sunday service and just see how much support the State of Israel receives from the pulpit and the congregation. Israel has no greater friend than a Southern, Christian conservative.

The only churches where you will not find such support are those churches that tend to support the likes of Louis Farrakhan or other Muslim leaders.

These are simple facts, not opinions. Take the time to inform yourself of the facts and the truth, not the myths and stereotypes, the next time you make a comment.

Posted by: AlfromGeorgia | September 16, 2009 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Pres Carter offered no specific evidence of his claim -- and the interviewer asked for none. Before we make a judgment, perhaps the ex Pres should specify what evidence he has other than his "feelings." This should be easy for a person with his resources. I believe that the "opinion" of an ex President matter far less than a fact based on reality and not feelings. Who are the real racists? I believe it might be the ones who most loudly "denounce" racism.

Posted by: dorjross1 | September 16, 2009 11:53 PM | Report abuse

If you have accomopished half of what President Carter has, feel free to critisize him. If objecting to Israel's determination to continue building settlements that deter peace, then I guess by your standards I am anti-semitic. In the meantime, you may want to examine more closely the signs carried and displayed at the anti-Obama rallys.

Posted by: Gondola1 | September 16, 2009 11:54 PM | Report abuse

When I read essays such as the one above, I become surprised at how engrained and acceptable and defended and commonplace vulgar racism is.

I think the above author is cynical and is supportive of racism.
We have conservative protesters who never protested as vehemently any of George Bush's atrocities which bankrupted the nation - who currently have insinuated that Prez Obama and his First Lady are animals, and have made racial slurs - Joe Wilson says you lie - is it merely coincidental that Mr. Wilson is a son of the confederate? The fact of the matter is that you and many whites like you support this rabid racism and endorse it and are fight tooth and nail to portray rabid racism as if it is all American, sensible and non-racist.

Posted by: QueenbeefromTakoma | September 17, 2009 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Additionally, you've created a culture in which black Americans' rights have retrogressed. It is now politcally deadly to have an honest discussion about racism in this country and to call racism out as it is. I'm pretty Sure that Pres. Obama knows that what Carter stated is the truth- however, what Carter stated does not help Pres Obama politically in a nation, when many white Americans share these sentiments that are bigotted towards black Americans.

The question is - can President Obama be president without this country having a discussion on race.

Because of the lack of power of black Americans relative to the seeming power of white people who support anti-black bigotry, it is better if President Obama can govern without a focus on race.

however, his white foes will stoke racial undercurrents because this alienates President Obama with valuable core constituents who are not black.

Posted by: QueenbeefromTakoma | September 17, 2009 12:08 AM | Report abuse

The ignorance of those commenting on race issues in the South is truly astounding. Again and with all due respect, you just don't know what you are talking about. Southern Republicans are conservative, but they are not racist. They are called racist because they oppose Obama. So what. Republicans from the North oppose Obama too. Are they racist too? I don't think so. People just run their mouth and have no clue what they are talking about.

Racism is the preference of a person of one race over another. It would be racist to vote AGAINST someone just because she is black, right. And, wouldn't it be racist to vote FOR someone just because she is White.

Well then, wouldn't it be racist to vote for someone because he is black and against someone just because he is white. Seems logical.

I wonder if any Democrats voted for Obama just because he was black. Wouldn't that be racist? Now, let's be honest about this. What do you think? Would that mean there are a lot of racist Southern Democrats? Racist Northern Democrats too? I am just saying......

Posted by: AlfromGeorgia | September 17, 2009 12:19 AM | Report abuse

"When the political temperature rises, it would be nice if we could turn to our elder statesmen and stateswomen for a cooling dose of wisdom and perspective"

Reading your column, it seems you think there are racist elements in the torrent of abuse and hate against Pres. Obama, but not as much as implied by some specific words used by Pres. Carter.

If you have called out the racist elements for their racism, you have a point. If, on the other hand, you have noticed these racist elements and kept mum about them, you have really shirked your duties as a journalist and opinion writer.

Looking at your previous PostPartisan columns, I see no evidence that you've addressed that issue. Now, perhaps you have, in some other forum -- but if you haven't, turning a blind eye towards racism and then attacking Pres. Carter for not doing so seems quite the double standard.

Posted by: sembtex | September 17, 2009 3:35 AM | Report abuse

What would be nice would be if one our nation's formerly leading newspapers weren't staffed with a bunch of right-wing apologists.

Posted by: uh_huhh | September 17, 2009 6:51 AM | Report abuse

I make mine the statement by quavaduff:

"How anyone can call President Carter the worse president after barely surviving the last 8 years under Dumbya is beyond me. Thousands of Americans killed by terrorists and in made up wars under Bush along with taking us into another depression. These white folks are letting their ignorant bias make them another minute...they will tell you a B rate actor but a AAA rated bigot, St Raygun, was a good president. LMAO"

Posted by: FedUp1 | September 17, 2009 8:04 AM | Report abuse

Regretfully, it is now, and has been for some time, possible to speak of former President Carter and senility in the same sentence.

Posted by: DQuixote1 | September 17, 2009 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Just as with any President or other political leader, a wide range of people disagree with President Obama for a wide range of reasons. But SOME of the people who disagree with him most stridently, and are most loudly outspoken with it, do (loudly) proclaim racist stereotypes. Look at SOME of the signs in pictures of the Saturday demonstration on the Mall.

Posted by: CherieOK | September 17, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Hmm. I went to one of the town hall meeting held by my Congressman, Vern Buchanan (R-rich white people) here in Florida. Trust me, there were plenty of racist mutterings in that crowd. And the screaming when one (the ONE) black person in the hall got up to speak sounded just like the old segregationists who screamed at black kids going to "white" schools back in the early days of the modern civil rights movement.

To his credit, Vern shut down the yellers by shouting, "Let him speak. We're all Americans here," until they shut up. But they were nasty. And racist. And kept muttering.

Posted by: roblimo | September 17, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

"Look at Jimmy Carters White House and Cabinet???? Is Jimmy Carter a racist???

Most southern white democrats were!!!!!!"

And most southern white republicans are now!!!!!!!

Since that is the GOP base, the shoe fits!

Carter may be an idiot, but he knows racist redneck trailer trash when he sees it.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 17, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

This column seem to me to be a little exercise in disingenuity. Although "overwhelming proportion" and "many" lack some definition in a vacuum, they were not without context in President Carter's remarks. He was clearly directing his commentary toward the ad hominem vitriol spewed against Barack Obama personally by a vocal segment of certain whites who have been in our faces for months now on the subject and not against legitimate opponents of his ideas - no matter how caustically expressed. There are elements of all of this that are difficult to quantify and that will always be so. I cannot help but wonder how much of Mr. Lane's criticism is based on his perception of "what percentage of Carter’s incessant condemnation of Israel is malicious or not". So I wonder about Charles Lane as he wonders about Jimmy Carter. To ignore the situation because it is hard to attach a percentage to it is to have one's head in the sand.

Posted by: polarbear3 | September 17, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

At best, this is a simplistic argument that ignores basic but vital details.

First of all, contemporary anger toward Israel and Israelis is a result of their behavior, not who they are or what they look like. The opposite is true for African Americans.

Second, blacks in the U.S., generally, and the South, in particular, began their relationship with this country as slaves, continued it as second-class citizens, and today still have widespread poverty and disenfranchizement as legacies of these earlier times. This is a vastly different history in scope and kind from that of Israel.

Third, Israel IS victimizing Palestinians. Whom, precisely, is being victimized by the African American community?

Mr. Lane's comparison is faulty; his argument holds no water.

Posted by: kjohnson3 | September 17, 2009 11:35 AM | Report abuse

There was nothing at all wrong with Carter's words. He had an opinion and he spoke it, and quite a few of us agreed with him.

The only folks who would disagree with Carter are either the same old psychos who rant without to everything else, or the closet racists who hate but swear that nobody can see it.

Posted by: lindalovejones | September 17, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

There was nothing at all wrong with Carter's words. He had an opinion and he spoke it, and quite a few of us agreed with him.

The only folks who would disagree with Carter are either the same old psychos who rant without end to everything, or the closet racists who hate but swear that nobody can see it.

Trying to say that racism doesn't exist or that there are no racists is not realistic.

Posted by: lindalovejones | September 17, 2009 12:15 PM | Report abuse

"The only thing I DO agree with Carter on is his even handed approach to the Palastinian situation. Israel has stolen land from these people and refuses to halt its settlement expansions. Israel leads the US around by the nose despite our giving them billions upon billions in aid."

"stolen" is not accurate. Israel occupies the west bank becuase of the failed invasion of 1967, and the reattempted military destruction of Israel in 1973. Israel didn't "steal" anything, but repelled invasions and beat their opponents. Arab frustration at Israel's "occupation" stems from an Arab refusal to halt continued military attacks by non-state entities (Hamas, PFLP, Abu Nidal, Islamic Jihad, to name a few), and stalwart nation state haters of Israel like Syria. Control the maniacs, enter into good-faith negotiations, and I'm sure Israel just may decide to leave the west bank in the same way they left southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip

Posted by: napoleon0469 | September 17, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

There was nothing wrong with Carter's words. I admire him for standing-he and his wife beside him as always. I understand having seen the same rants in his election. The characterization of Carter being (the "dumb Peanut farmer") when in fact he was and is one our greater leaders of the World. He was on the money as far as I am concerned.

Policy my rear end! There is policy alright-racist to the bone that work behind the scenes obstructing any progress or agenda Obama has. And the Republican Party has become their haven.

Steele; Gibbs; Lott; and all you other blind as a bat people-get the heck out of here!! You have no clue. You will never be a Party that is diversed-never-ever-in your dreams. You have nothing to offer-NOTHING!!!!

Rick Sanchez mentioned an interesting little fact. How can you help or contribute to reform when you buy into the industries that oppose any reform. And that is for Democrat, Republican or Independent. When one makes 4 million dollars as a buddy with health industry, I doubt that person is trying to make changes for the people but, for their own selfish agenda and for rich "fat heads".

So, yes I pray along with that little old lady that Obama is fired up and ready to go. I am. I am ready to move on to issue after issue and get this Nation back to being an America we all can be proud of. And Joe Biden good work. Go Joe go!! It is good you are on the ground checking things out in Bagdad. Time to get out of Iraq and Afganistan and let them either realize they are killing themselves and they look not only stupid but are destroying the future of their own children. They are building nations of "killing machines" and if they think God is pleased-that is a joke.

Posted by: Scar1 | September 17, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

This week’s Jedi mind trick to control the public square’s conversation is “So my opposition to President Obama makes me a racist?” If inserting that line and it changes the overarching conversational subject, I say well on you.

For those who cannot be derailed by such a sophomoric tactic and stays on subject, the overarching subject remains calling out actions such as 1) on the public Face book network likening the First Lady to an escaped gorilla. 2) created a cartoon of an ape laying on the ground with bullet holes and two burly white male cops standing over him with pistols drawn (implication being President Obama is an ape and should be ….) 3) Sending an e-mail picture depicting the White House lawn planted with watermelons under the title "No Easter egg hunt this year."

Now we either have a lot of people that didn’t fully understand or want to understand for themselves what the subject definitions are, instead they opted for the news media’s host personalities to defined it for them; or a number of individuals wanting a sense of belonging simply want to aligned themselves for no other reason than to look shock and say “A racist, Who me?”

Posted by: Mas1 | September 17, 2009 1:26 PM | Report abuse

And to CNN: Roland that look makes me laugh. When Lott spoke I could see let me "slap this joker"-I felt the same way.

Steele too. Policy? You got folk who want the President to die in their prayers and calling him insane things and you say it is policy?

Pig slop out ya mouth and rear end!!! These nut cases are serious as a heart attack!!

We got militia groups; grown mf slamming doors on black kids and Limbaugh trashing our kids as criminals. No they are just tired of the nonsense they see everyday from racist white kids being taught by their hateful a.s.s parents.

If you think our children are going to not fight-wrong answer. Oh it is boiling over.
Let some joke push my grand and see what happens-it will take an army-betcha that.

No, I teach them respect but, I also teach them when they are being hurt because of their color. I teah them the importance of being more than an animal; more than a joke; more than a name-I teach them to be more and with pride and with guts. I teach them to stand in season and out of season and if that means to fight then, do not back down-stand and whip a.s.s!!!

Not your slave, not your pimp, not your statistic; not your dog; not you gorilla but, the best child of God ever with grace, education and pride and backbone to kick butt and become number one not number two.

Posted by: Scar1 | September 17, 2009 1:36 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Scar1 | September 17, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

I salute President Carter and all our Presidents-the job is not easy. I have respected them all. I may not agree but, I give them the respect.

America has that responsibiltiy to show the world no matter who is the captain of the ship we are rowing to shore. He is the captain and we are the crew and the only star leading us is the Lord Almighty in God we trust.

Posted by: Scar1 | September 17, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

There is no analogy between Carter's criticisms of Israeli policy and the right's criticisms of Obama's proposals for health care refore. Israel's policies and actions regarding the continuation of "settlements" are disapproved by most of the civilized world: they are a needless and unfair provocation, and however reasonable or unreasonable the behavior of Palestinians may be, settlements are still wrong and constitute, by themselves, a barrier to any resolution of the problems in the Middle East.

On the other hand, the objectors to the Obama health insurance reform push are entirely out of step with the rest of the civilized world. As WAPO's T R Reid points out, ALL the other wealthy nations of the world have made the decision to provide some form of universal access to health care to their citizens. ALL have healthier populations and lower health care costs than the US. Here's a link:

So, since Israel's actions are wrong by any reasonable ethical standard, critics of Israel don't need the ulterior motive of anti-semitism to motivate them, and it is unfair and unreasonable to accuse them of it.

But, since Obama's proposals are ethically correct and the overwhelming consensus is that wealthy nations are obliged to provide health care for their citizens, we MUST look for an ulterior motive such as racism or personal gain to explain the actions of those who oppose him.

Posted by: martimr1 | September 17, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

People who are dismissing pres. Carter's comments as ludicrous because they don't represent the attitudes of those who oppose President Obama's policies clearly have not listened to (or read) what Carter said. He did not say that those who vehemently opposed Obama's policies were racist, but rather those who vehemently opposed the man himself were. This is a critical distinction. Of course people can have honest, and even heated dispute with policy, but that is entirely different from attacking the man himself. And while it may certainly be true that those who oppose the man himself are but a minority of those who oppose his policies only, that does not make Carters statements any less true. If you wish to enter in rigorous debate on this topic, please at least be aware of what you're talking about and listen/read for yourselves, rather than reacting to the opinions of others, most of whom (on both sides) have their own agenda in twisting the words of others to suit their own purpose.

Posted by: ja3deluxe | September 17, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Everyone is talking but who is actually listening. The time for talk is and has been over. So, some continue ignorance and hatred so why listen to that. I am not wasting my time or yours conversing with jackas.s.s and foolish nonsense.

So, talk and hopefully some of you will have something intelligent to say and give us a reason to listen and not be pawns when you want our vote or do a survey or attend your meetings to create a colorful background.

It is wiser to listen than talk and really be saying nothing worthwhile and not really mean it. Just be hateful and racist with no rational reasoning at all. So, my skin is different but, so is your damn brain-got it? Guess not you were not listening.

Posted by: Scar1 | September 17, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Carter is correct.
Sad to say.
What he is addressing is the unspoken motivation behind the spoken (and displayed) behavior of these groups.
They are the culturally challenged.
Lane said:
"For the most part, those who take issue with Israel’s conduct do so in good faith."
Not in my experience.
I have many friends, good Democrats, who took out after the Israelis the minute the sparks appeared in the Middle East.
They couldn't be reasoned with.
They ranted about the poor, abused Palestinians, but they absolutely dismissed any discussion of the damage done by suicide bombers toward Israel.
They refused to acknowledge that Israel had any right to defend itself.
(To listen to them, you would think they were demanding that Israel go meekly to their new Holocaust, just as many people talked about the behavior of the Jews when they were rounded up by the Nazis during WWII.)
The next thing I knew, one of the older ringleaders of this discussion about 5 years ago began referring us to the Stormfront website.
I was horrified.
I asked myself why this dear friend, such a nice guy otherwise, could fall into this scenario?
There still remains an unspoken distrust of Jews, just as deep and pervasive as racism.
Jews are very sensitive to it.
So, Lane is being entirely too easy on these demonstrators -- and on the "Just say NO" Republicans in Congress, I might add.
I think Carter is correct and I'm glad he is speaking up.

Posted by: Judy-in-TX | September 17, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Carter knows being from Georgia and he knows the Old South so, we remember that bad taste and what it was like and when its ugly stink as,s rears its head-we smell it a mile away. So, trying to cover it and say it is just policy is a joke. It is policy with a twist. So, "President Carter-you and Rosalyn rock". You are not afraid to stand and we are so proud of you for all the work and sacrifice you and your wife have endured for those less but, greater in the sight of God.

Well done thy faithful servant-well done. Bill Cosby, CNN and that is all of them-too many to name but, good reporting.

President Obama and Joe Biden; Pelosi and the whole administration-hard work but "fired up and ready to go". Democrats-that should be your theme for the years to come-"fired up and ready to go". Talk about a sermon-oh I can go on that theme. When you cross over on dry land after hate, sickness and you are all alone but, you make it to the other side-yes indeedy you can shout! Hallelujah! Fired up and ready to go. I don't know that little old lady but, I know her spirit and she was ready to go through to the end come what may. And President Obama knew and knows it won't be easy and is not afraid to go through the valley and wake up those dry bones and watch them shake off the dust; rattle and muscle up "fired up and ready to go." So, in the spirit of the living God we are not looking to the right or left but to the center of the mountain from whence cometh our help and so, whatever comes he and we are grounded in the preparation and the spirit of God girded with the full armour of God and the breastplate of righteousness; helmet of salvation; sword of truth.. and will do all to stand. Come what may-ain't worried about it. Reform will pass; ignorance will pass; confusion will pass; war will pass heaven and earth will pas but, His Word will be forever. Not worried Republicans, Birtha, Limbaugh, Palin, Hate groups; this too shall pass. So, not even worried-already fired up and ready to go and the timber already sent and delivered long ago.

Posted by: Scar1 | September 17, 2009 4:20 PM | Report abuse

You note that, "...I would never absolve every single Obama critic of racism, basically for the reasons Carter suggests."

Of course you seem to absolve ALL black racists. Like the solid 94% racial block that voted for Obama based on "color".

Give it a rest! Dislike of "others" takes many forms - and few of those forms are "purely" racial or religious or social-class....human emotions ARE a fatc of life.

As long as you spend OUR time bem,oaning that fact I am certain YOU are a "closet-racist".


Posted by: anderson2 | September 17, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

President Carter is speaking a truth that few Americans are willing to hear. He grew up at the height of Jim Crow in the Deep South—the man knows racism when he sees it. Most white Americans simply cannot face the ugly past of “race in America” and how much it is still with us today.

Rep. Joe Wilson’s, R-S.C., inability to contain himself from yelling out “You lie” at the president during a joint session of Congress is a classic case of an angry Southern white male reaching his limit with the uppity Ivy-League educated, one-term-senator-turned-president. Some may argue that this doesn’t make him a racist. But at best, his outburst demonstrates an intolerance and a lack of respect that he never would have shown to a white commander in chief. Such is the case with much of what we hear from our fellow citizens. There is an anger, a vitriol, a hatred of this president that seems deeply personal. And it is unnerving.

As Americans, all of us should be alarmed at the increasing hostility of our dialogue: There’s Fox News TV host Glenn Beck calling the president a “racist.” Rush Limbaugh declaring that “Obama’s America” is one “where black kids can beat up white kids on a bus.” Then there’s the “birthers” who swear that Obama is not a legitimate commander in chief and those who sob that they want “their country back.” My question is: From whom do you want your country back?

The problem is that we’ve gotten so used to not dealing with racial tensions in this country. They’ve become so nuanced that we cover or shrug them off because they are not as blatant as they were in the 1790s, 1840s, 1920s or 1960s. That’s a mistake. Whether we like it or not, those tensions are still here with us.

Posted by: Privilegedmen | September 17, 2009 5:54 PM | Report abuse

And what kind of racism is it that you practice when you don't mind the death, destruction, and humiliation of the palestinians, but you take offense when the feelings of their opressors are hurt?

Posted by: Kingofkings1 | September 17, 2009 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Does 30 death threats a day mean anything?

Posted by: Wildthing1 | September 17, 2009 6:32 PM | Report abuse

I believe I am beginning to understand the Marxist-socialist way of doing things. It is still a little different from my up bringing but I can see where it is useful for the government to explain to the followers how they should think, and they just do it. That is very convenient and a simple way of keeping everyone in line with political correctness.

First, all acts of dissention or disagreement is met with call of racism, bigotry, anti-Semitism, Zionist or other catch phrase that suits the moment and possibly disarms those that may not be totally committed to the issue at hand. Reason or rational thinking is not allowed by anyone that can not see that Socialism is really good for everyone. It simply cripples motivation and that works fine for those that have none in the first place.

Next, all the socialist liberal democrat actors, politicians, political officers and ACORN advisors, meet to decide what the best condemning action may be taken to further intimidate or otherwise discredit the offending person or groups involved. I have seen a great deal of trumping with the race card but is has been over played until the word racist and bigot really has no meaning any more. I have noticed that the more rational people realize they have been duped by Obama into following a run-a-way train heading into oblivion. They are starting to leap off as that train is forced to slow down to show it’s credentials and having trouble producing any real substance or value to the claims made.

Finally, the State run socialist media jumps on board to do their part with the comrades and commissars in power to enlighten the ObamaNation followers on how they should react to the aggression, and being the good mindless subjects that they are, mimic and repeat the catch phrases and slogans they are given by the media to counter all claims regardless of the merit or rationale.

All seems to work very orderly, controlled and communist in a European setting, but not so well in a free society where there are still those that can and will think for them self.

Work on cleaning the House of corruption, both financial and social, before attempting to get the strength and backbone of America behind the government again. The people’s confidence is lost and the radical attempts to pass anti-American legislation is now being watched by all. Expect a much greater demonstration than 9/12 if changes for the better are not seen soon.

Reform health care in the private sector first and then focus on the financial!

Posted by: longbow65 | September 17, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Hey, I married Carter's niece, my father in law who I could not for years see how he earned his money. A good southern Baptist from Georgia he carried a bible in one hand and a lynch rope is another. His pastor was caught in a sex scandal, guilty but sentence suspended. Mr. Father in law's stock and trade was the weekly rental of substandard huts rented to his Nigras. He we never in the area but rent was collected by his Buck Neeegra. Let us join hands and thank God peanuts he gave us and the guidance of Jesus.

Posted by: hondolane13 | September 18, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Is the suggestion that Carter is wrong not because he has excessively negative feelings ('hatred') about Jews but because he has excessively positive ('hyperbolic') feelings ('concern') for the Palestinians?
How does one show that someone's sympathy for others is excessive or hyperbolic? The natural human condition is to be excessively concerned with oneself and to use hyperbole in favour of one's own cause or one's own people. Perhaps this is a condition that the Bible and other religious tracts make some effort to correct.
If Carter is really concerned with people with whom he has no special personal reason to identify perhaps I should regard him as a better man than I am, like Gunga Din.
Or perhaps we should fall back on the proposition that he resolutely declines to be fair to Jews.

Posted by: MHughes976 | September 18, 2009 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Expressing any dissenting opinion makes me, according to Nancy Pelosi, a dangerous and violent person; according to Jimmy Carter, a racist. So, in reply to Privilegedmen, I want my country back from whomever seeks to label dissent and free expression as subversive and/or racist.I am a perfectly civil, fair minded, patriotic, tax-paying, retired, little old lady who wants her country back from those who use words like "racist" like a club to threaten into silence those who do not embrace their leftist views.

Posted by: ddygdriver | September 18, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

With Pres Carter you get a reversion to the
past with his associated apology for his
feelings regarding Blacks when he was younger. Lest ye forget he was a Nuclear
Sub Commander prepared and committed to kill
thousands if not millions of innocent people
with a simple command. He is much older and
senile and cannot annunciate his positions
as clear as he likes and therefore mixes
metaphors which causes references he would
never had made if he could understand their

Posted by: fegbdf | September 18, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Carter is a great man and a rare ex-president with courage to speak truth to power ie AIPAC.

Posted by: qualquan | September 19, 2009 8:32 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company