President Jimmy Carter: Success or failure

I don’t really think Carter has been a very good ex-president either. But that is another debate entirely.

Nixon broke the law and he got pardoned. No strings attached.

Relevant to the discussion of Jimmy Carter and his ability as a president how? :rolleyes:

Well you’re 2 for 5. Camp David and SALT II were major accomplishments although the CD Accords are probably more of a credit to Sadat than Begin or Carter but all 3 were instramental in its signing so lets put it in Carter’s good list.

Panama Canal Treaty - I said earlier that Panama received their independence from Colombia and for this sold us the Canal Zone. Fair exchange I think and from a historical and moral perspective we did not have to give it back. As I remember, giving back the Canal pissed off a lot of Americans, call into question how we would get from one ocean to the other during the next conventional war, and the exchange made the Panamanians happy with the US for about 2 hours.

Olympic Boycott - Way to show the non-political nature of the Olympics, steal the opportunity of a lifetime from our athletes, and lead to the Warsaw Pact boycott of the LA games in 1984. Oh, by the way, did it get the Soviets out of Afghanistan?

Draft Dodgers - If you object to a law, its OK to violate it? Even supporters of civil disobedience (to quote Maddox, “Civil disobedience is still disobedience.”) agree that one should accept the consequences for their actions. Those should have filed for conscientious (sp?) objector status. I disagree with having to pay taxes on things other than pay (e.g. gambling wins, windfalls, inheritances, etc.) and it is an unpopular law - so can I get pardoned for tax evasion please?
I agree that the dodgers should have had to serve an amount of time in service. Actually, I would have said 2 years in the Peace Corps and those who went to Canada would lose their citizenship (Have fun under the Maple Leaf, eh.). Refusal to serve in the Peace Corps would be liable for prosecution.

You were wrong then and still wrong now. The Canal Zone was ill-gotten booty and giving it back was the morally correct thing to do. I don’t care if it made a lot of Americans angry, it was and is the correct thing to do.

Why? It was a fair trade for helping Panama gain its independence from Colombia and was purchased with hard currency and many yellow fever deaths. I’ll tell you what, I’ll sell you something and then you give it back to me for free if those sort of deals are “morally correct”.

Me too (I was 20). I voted for Anderson.