I think Leslie has a great idea. Don with his own "Firing Line" style program. It could be loosely centered around HR, but include politics, religion, and any other controversial topic of the day. Geno could be his first guest to debate the merits of the Carter presidency.
I think even better, something patterened after the Kilpatrick/Alexander duo on the old "Point/Counterpoint" that 60 Minutes used to run. Don could do the conservative view and Gillian could do the liberal. I'd buy tickets to that. x:-)
OK Beag, I'll buy tickets too. First topic, "Should Congress pass a law making Spanish our official second language". Followed by "Illegal immigration - does it truly help our economy".
OK, I give up, what is "freedom of speech has absolutely no legal relevance outside a government context" suppose to mean?
While you are on the subject, please explain to all of us again why Jimmy Carter's dissident views should be stifled -- I mean it's clear that you don't like him and that you disagree with what he says - for all you know, I might too --but why shouldn't he be allowed to speak his mind? What gives Zell Miller the right to spout-off but not Mr. Carter?
Don most probably can't answer these questions without a long speech or a story, but as near as I can tell, former President Carter should stifle himself just because he should, and the difference between Zell Miller and Carter is because one is cool and the other uncool, therefore Zell can speak and Carter can't.
Geno: I have no intention of taking on the project of educating you as to the legal meaning of 'freedom of speech', but, it grants certain rights only when the government is the one attempting to stifle speech. A brief example, and assuming you do not work for the government, would be your employer telling you that you could not speak out in a certain manner about a certain subject, not already protected by the NLRA; and then you objecting in your shrill fashion that your free speech rights are being violated. That would not be so. In a legal context, stifling speech only applies to government organizations. If you need more information do some research.
I am considering all these suggestions. x:-)I like the one with me opposite G3, sorta like Hannidy and Corpse. Ray, you're hired as booking flunkie. And I'd let you stand in in my absence if I didn't think you'd pull a Judas on me.
I personally like old homeboy Jimmy Carter and I loved his momma, Miss Lillian, the original Barbara Bush. But I also recognize his irrelevance. I'll have him over for grits, greens and pork chops any time he can come. I don't imply the man had no right to speak his mind. I simply remind us all that it is a given that no president has ever broken that code except this gentleman, none. Any president in my lifetime who has had a mike in his face and is asked to comment on the current president or his decisions or American foreign policy always had the same answer and would not make a public comment, concluding that the country would not be well served by doing so.
Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.
I don't know that much about Mr. Miller, but I listen up when he appears on the tube and I do find him relevant. His relevance was certainly established when he (a democrat) was the opening speaker at the Republican National Convention. His relevance is maintained, I think, when he continues to point out the foibles and foolishness of Kennedy, Boxer, Feinstein and Leahy. His relevance is furthered when he continues to exemplify a fine, Christian father, husband and grandfather in his actions and words. Gosh, will that do for starters. The difference in relevance and irrelevance should be obvious to folks. An irrelevant person is one who seems to have no impact nor make a difference. A relevant person is precisely the opposite. I'm sure, however, that Mr. Carter is relevant to someone, no doubt. He's basically irrelevant from a presidential, historical perspective. He's no doubt relevant in his home, at the hardware store, in his church and sitting behind home plate at the Braves game. That's the only time I saw him in person, and right then he was even relevant to me.
Wake up Gillian3. Or shall we call you Mr. Combes?
Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-05-05 AT 10:45AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Relevance (along with being subjective) is not, in and of itself, a virture. Mother Theresa and Mathatma Ghandi were "relevant" -- but so were Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.
Conversely, everyday, countless “irrelevant” people in countless simple ways, make the world a better place.
When the former president of Habitat for Humanity was accused of sexually harassing an employee and subsequently fired, Carter lent his support to the new foundation started by this dethroned president. He played one against the other trying to stay on the good side of both parties by supporting each. He did support the appointment of the new president of H for H giving his stamp of approval. We can all rest easier now.
Additionally, a book on the top ten seller list of NY Times by Bernie Goldberg lists Carter as one of the top 100 people who have done the most damage to the US.
Goldberg's book was plugged on the Daily Show three or four weeks ago, along with Goldberg as a guest. Goldberg had a tough time with one of Stewart's questions - out of the 100 people who have done the most damage, only 3 could be called conservative and the rest could be called liberal. The question was, couldn't someone with a liberal bias write a book and do the same thing - 97 of those featured are conservative and only 3 liberal? I don't remember if 97 and 3 were the exact numbers but it was close to that. Goldberg danced around the question but couldn't answer it. One's bias always drives writers, those who write political books and those who post political stuff on the forum.
I don't know about relevance, but Carter reminds me of a child who would rather have "bad" attention than no attention. He has nothing substantive to add to current social discourse so he just stands ups occasionally and throws out some criticism of the current administration. When he left office, even though I thought him ineffective, I respected him. No respect now though -- he's too smart to believe his actions/comments are helpful to our country. Therefore, I conclude he is simply self-serving. I agree with Don.
Personally, I think the whole bloody lot of them from the guy with the funny first name Don cites to GW himself are irrelevant - especially GW, who is doing more to harm this country than Carter ever did.
Fast forward a few years. I wonder what people will be saying. I don't think that it will take near as long as it has for some to decide that Carter was and is "bad".
I don't agree or disagree and simply hadn't thought much about Carter over the years - guess that is more to the irrelevant side. The thing I remember most about him, other than the hostage situation, was the incredible inflation - 10 to 15% annually, leading to that level of pay increases every year. What followed, of course, was employee expectation that this was the norm, and their being p----- off when the %'s dropped when inflation did. Carter was certainly relevant to HR practice in those years.
I love CNN in the morning while I dress (can't believe the things my fellow Americans will say at times -- yesterday this guy said that he wanted to take all the Democrats in the US, line them up and shoot them!!!
Dasher: Don never told us he was on CNN yesterday!
You know - that fellow did not sound like our Don -- He was really CRAZY. Besides -- even thought Don and I have differing politics I would not want to be in this world without him, and somehow I feel he feels the same about me. LOL
I don't care to remember much about Carter but about the time he left office is when the 52 hostages were released and John Lennon was killed shortly thereafter (in December I think).
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-05-05 AT 05:50PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Gillian3; as I have asked in my profile and many times since, when you so obviously dislike me personally, please do your best to critique the post and offer a differing opinion or a better way or point out what about my post is offbase. Or post something factual of significance or at least something that will reflect your personal opinion that has some substantive meaning. My remarks about Mr. Carter have nothing to do with his being a democrat. I would feel the same if he were a Republican, which he would have been had he not needed the Georgia Black vote. (He carried the whole South the first time)
You don't do much of anything to promote your own credibility when all you do is slam me and slam me and offer silly soundbite minutia comments. You remind me of a fourth grader in the back of the room shooting spitballs and making fart noises when the teacher turns her back. If you know anything of Mr. Carter's relevance please post it. Otherwise, you might want to skip the thread.
As you told me not long ago in a private email, your real problem with me stems from your disdain over my references to your state as 'the left coast' and as 'Mexifornia'. I can't help the truth of that.
Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.
I recall Mr. Carter's presidency as a very difficult time. Awful things occurred during this tenure -- I agree, and yes he was not forceful when perhaps it was required.
I greatly admire him personally -- not only his works of charity but he alone - I thought - told the truth about the war and our involvement during the last election. He appears to me to love his country and his family and the ideals his mother thaught him -- i.e., integrity.
It is not an easy thing to be so public about the condition of America at this time in history. We are looking with current -- not future eyes. I fear that Jimmy Carter is more courageous than some will give him credit for.
Nope, my posts had nothing to do with Ca.and your version, nor likes or dislikes. I don't like or dislike you personally since I don't know you. All it was was my reaction to what I came to view as a relentless skewering of the former President. I allowed that to get to me and I got personal and for that I apologize. The original premise, that Carter is the only President to say negative things and that this violates an unwritten rule is interesting. I would watch an interview, conducted by someone as nuetral as possible, in which this would be discussed with the former President. I would like to know his opinions on the topic
Why would you put stock in what Carter felt about the subject. Why not go with the opinions of historians and the pundits on all three major networks and all the cable channels. They've all said it just isn't done, has never been done and Carter is in a league of his own. That was the only point in the original post to begin with, not to skewer him. Why skewer a raisin? No meat on a raisin.
This thread seems to have taken on a life of its own and I have enjoyed reading. Gillian made a comment that bias will be revealed in one's writings and I believe that is true. Parabeagle commented regarding the current Presidents irrelevence as a response to livindon's comments concerning Carter's irrelevence. It would in my opinion be impossible for anyone who holds or has held the highest office in the land to be irrelevant.When I was a child growing up during the depression adults often referred to certain people as "yellow dog democrats". If there is a similar description for republicans then livindon in my opinion you might qualify. Probably I have lived longer than most who post here and have experienced many things but have never seen so many people who seem to worship George W. Bush and don't want to hear anything negative about him. I respect Jimmy Carter for whom I did not vote for having the gonads to speak out. FYI so you will not think I am a yellow dog democrat be it known that I voted for Nixon, Goldwater and Reagan. Anyone who loves the Bush Clan should spend some time studying their history. Go back to Prescott Bush and his business association with Averil Harriman(a democrat) and their business dealings with Nazi Germany and come on down to the now president Bush. Check out his early business ventures with these Companies. "Arbusto", "Spectrum 7", "Harken Energy". Then spend the next few weeks studying the position papers of conservative think tank, The New American Century, otherwise know as PNAC. Look them up on their own website at newamericancentury.org and you may come away with a new perspective as to why we are in Iraq. Another interesting piece of info would be a study of the Carlyse Group (A holding co. heavy in military equipment, armament and munition companies). Also check out Ahmed Chalibi a one time exile from Iraq who also happened to be under indictment from Jordan for a 21 million bank fraud but yet was paid millions of dollars for intelligence by our defense department that didn't quite turn out to be the dancing in streets, when we invade Iraq, that he apparently sold to our leaders. The only time I ever heard the president asked about this gentlemen his response was something like , yes I saw him in the rope line. It was later learned he had been in meetings in the white house when the President was there. I personally know thatI saw him on TV at one of the State of the Union addresses when he was sitting in the row behind Mrs Bush and only a few seats away. You don't get that kind of seat if you only met the president in a rope line. Reminds me of the president barely knowing Ken Lay who he fondly refered to as Kennyboy.I could go on & on about things but would it do any good unless people decide for themselves that the President has not been truthful with them on many things.
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-12-05 AT 04:55AM (CST)[/font][br][br]"concerning Carter's irrelevence. It would in my opinion be impossible for anyone who holds or has held the highest office in the land to be irrelevant."
It's hardly impossible at all, my friend. It only requires the passage of two or three years after having accomplished virtually nothing of historical value. It is entirely possible to fade into irrelevance, as Mr. Carter has done. Perhaps you should visit the definition of the word 'relevant' in one of the several dictionaries in use today.
It's interesting how all of the 'screamers' proclaim the current Bush president to be a literal dunce, a blundering idiot, a buffoon in a pointy hat, hardly capable of speech or intelligent thought....yet at the same time paint him as a crafty and wiley participant in some imaginary secret conspiracy to take over the world. Which way will you have it?
I don't particularly 'like' either George Bush. I'm just guilty of considering the alternative, a weakness I've always had.
I expect, both ways. We all use points to bolster our argument, and it is not uncommon for someone to then say "wait a minute, the last time you said ----------". Not unusual at all. In fact, in one of your posts on this thread, a response to me, you cast pundits from the major news networks as credible in order to bolster your argument. In other posts, in other threads you have said that those of us that watch those networks aren't getting the real story - we should watch Fox news instead. Which way do you want it?
Comments
While you are on the subject, please explain to all of us again why Jimmy Carter's dissident views should be stifled -- I mean it's clear that you don't like him and that you disagree with what he says - for all you know, I might too --but why shouldn't he be allowed to speak his mind? What gives Zell Miller the right to spout-off but not Mr. Carter?
I am considering all these suggestions. x:-)I like the one with me opposite G3, sorta like Hannidy and Corpse. Ray, you're hired as booking flunkie. And I'd let you stand in in my absence if I didn't think you'd pull a Judas on me.
I personally like old homeboy Jimmy Carter and I loved his momma, Miss Lillian, the original Barbara Bush. But I also recognize his irrelevance. I'll have him over for grits, greens and pork chops any time he can come. I don't imply the man had no right to speak his mind. I simply remind us all that it is a given that no president has ever broken that code except this gentleman, none. Any president in my lifetime who has had a mike in his face and is asked to comment on the current president or his decisions or American foreign policy always had the same answer and would not make a public comment, concluding that the country would not be well served by doing so.
Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.
Wake up Gillian3. Or shall we call you Mr. Combes?
Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.
Conversely, everyday, countless “irrelevant” people in countless simple ways, make the world a better place.
When the former president of Habitat for Humanity was accused of sexually harassing an employee and subsequently fired, Carter lent his support to the new foundation started by this dethroned president. He played one against the other trying to stay on the good side of both parties by supporting each. He did support the appointment of the new president of H for H giving his stamp of approval. We can all rest easier now.
Additionally, a book on the top ten seller list of NY Times by Bernie Goldberg lists Carter as one of the top 100 people who have done the most damage to the US.
I love CNN in the morning while I dress (can't believe the things my fellow Americans will say at times -- yesterday this guy said that he wanted to take all the Democrats in the US, line them up and shoot them!!!
Dasher: Don never told us he was on CNN yesterday!
You don't do much of anything to promote your own credibility when all you do is slam me and slam me and offer silly soundbite minutia comments. You remind me of a fourth grader in the back of the room shooting spitballs and making fart noises when the teacher turns her back. If you know anything of Mr. Carter's relevance please post it. Otherwise, you might want to skip the thread.
As you told me not long ago in a private email, your real problem with me stems from your disdain over my references to your state as 'the left coast' and as 'Mexifornia'. I can't help the truth of that.
Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.
I greatly admire him personally -- not only his works of charity but he alone - I thought - told the truth about the war and our involvement during the last election. He appears to me to love his country and his family and the ideals his mother thaught him -- i.e., integrity.
It is not an easy thing to be so public about the condition of America at this time in history. We are looking with current -- not future eyes. I fear that Jimmy Carter is more courageous than some will give him credit for.
It's hardly impossible at all, my friend. It only requires the passage of two or three years after having accomplished virtually nothing of historical value. It is entirely possible to fade into irrelevance, as Mr. Carter has done. Perhaps you should visit the definition of the word 'relevant' in one of the several dictionaries in use today.
It's interesting how all of the 'screamers' proclaim the current Bush president to be a literal dunce, a blundering idiot, a buffoon in a pointy hat, hardly capable of speech or intelligent thought....yet at the same time paint him as a crafty and wiley participant in some imaginary secret conspiracy to take over the world. Which way will you have it?
I don't particularly 'like' either George Bush. I'm just guilty of considering the alternative, a weakness I've always had.