Hitchens on America’s most Christ-like president and his “big, smug mouth”
posted at 11:01 am on May 22, 2007 by Allahpundit
The Christ comparison comes from Rosie, of course, not Hitch.
You’ll have to put up with a few perfunctory swipes at religion, but I think you’ll find the rest to your liking.
Dare I say, very much to your liking.
In the Carter years, the United States was an international laughingstock. This was not just because of the prevalence of his ghastly kin: the beer-sodden brother Billy, doing deals with Libyan President Muammar Qaddafi, and the grisly matriarch, Miz Lillian. It was not just because of the president’s dire lectures on morality and salvation and his weird encounters with lethal rabbits and UFOs. It was not just because of the risible White House “Bible study” sessions run by Bert Lance and his other open-palmed Elmer Gantry pals from Georgia. It was because, whether in Afghanistan, Iran, or Iraq—still the source of so many of our woes—the Carter administration could not tell a friend from an enemy. His combination of naivete and cynicism—from open-mouthed shock at Leonid Brezhnev’s occupation of Afghanistan to underhanded support for Saddam in his unsleeping campaign of megalomania—had terrible consequences that are with us still. It’s hardly an exaggeration to say that every administration since has had to deal with the chaotic legacy of Carter’s mind-boggling cowardice and incompetence.
It get better from there, with a rousing defense of Tony Blair. Click.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Carter was far from ‘christ like’, perhaps in some of the liberal theology out there though.
jp on May 22, 2007 at 11:06 AM
I hope I never piss off Hitchens. I’d hate to have that vulture pick apart my bones. Agree with him or not, he has a way with words.
windbag on May 22, 2007 at 11:10 AM
You only have to look at the events of 1979 to see what a disaster the Carter Doctine was.
In Iraq in 1979 Saddam comes to power in a coup.
In Iran 1979 the US abandons the Shah and the Ayatollahs come to power
In 1979 Zia al Haq overthrows the Pakistani Government and establishes a pro Islamic government
in 1979 the Soviets back the Sandinistas in their conquest of Nicaragua
in 1979 The Marxist rebels take over Angola.
In 1979 the Soviets invade Afganistan.
In 1979 we give back the Panama Canal.
In 1979 the San Salvador civil war erupts.
In 1979 The Soviets crack down on Solidarity in Poland.
William Amos on May 22, 2007 at 11:11 AM
Nobody does smackdown like Hitchens. Every sentence in that piece was
/drudge
RushBaby on May 22, 2007 at 11:11 AM
If Billy had imbibed Glenlivet, I think Hitch might have some admiration for the man. Just sayin.
Matticus Finch on May 22, 2007 at 11:11 AM
Hitchens is lucky that Hitchens won’t be around to write the obit when Hitchens dies. That said, it’s good to see him aim at a target that deserves the full Hitchens treatment, and few deserve it more than Carter.
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 11:12 AM
OK, fine. That was a good one. As long as he’s the enemy of my enemy he’s my friend. Sort of. Maybe.
Drum on May 22, 2007 at 11:16 AM
“Nothing they ever do, or did, can be attributed to anything but the very highest motives.”
I’m more and more convinced that our current downward spiral is due to the Right’s appeasement of the Left. As in: even if we don’t agree with their methods, most of us are willing to grant them “good intentions”. Why???
After 100,000,000 dead at the hands of their “ideals”, and after their behead-me-oh-innocent-freedom-fighter stand “against” (ahem) Islamofascism, isn’t it way past time we stopped even granting them the undeserved gift of “good intentions”? Any deeper look into liberal psychology reveals motives far, far from high. We lose half the battle by pretending otherwise.
Halley on May 22, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Carter is low hanging fruit.
BTW, I can’t wait for gmcjetpilot to chime in! C’mon gmc, Jimmuh needs a hug after that thrashing.
common sensineer on May 22, 2007 at 11:22 AM
Along with Hitchens, peanut allergies affect approximately 1.5 million people in the United States. As the most common cause of life-threatening allergic reactions (anaphylaxis), peanut allergies account for 80 percent of fatal or near-fatal allergic reactions each year. You can reduce your risk of having an allergic reaction to peanuts by knowing as much as you can about peanut allergies and how to avoid Jimmy Carter.
soulsirkus on May 22, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Jimmy Carter is history’s greatest monster!
I couldn’t resist an old Simpson’s gag.
I’m weak.
MoxArgon on May 22, 2007 at 11:27 AM
I’d almost think that he’d savor it, if he could write a scathing obit of himself.
Kai on May 22, 2007 at 11:28 AM
Glad to see GW finally put this turkey in his place. Notice how quick he started retracting his comments when he found out the White House had enough and jerked his chain.
driller on May 22, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Though … Brzezinski still makes a good case for their supporting the Mujahideen (in 1979) against the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul, with the goal of luring the USSR to invade Afghanistan, giving them (the Soviets) “their Vietnam.”
When confronted in an interview about not having the foresight to see that they might be helping to create an Islamic nightmare, his response was: “What is most important for world history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet Empire? Some Islamic hotheads or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?”
Anyway, I digress, Carter’s still a dick.
Drum on May 22, 2007 at 11:31 AM
Here’s the anti-religion crack we were warned about; I would add that there’s a tinge anti-Southern snobbism mixed in to boot. But I can’t fault him too much. It’s a lot to ask of a well-educated Brit not to be snobby.
smellthecoffee on May 22, 2007 at 11:31 AM
What? He probably already has! An ego that big? Are you kidding?
Drum on May 22, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Ouch! Not too big a fan of peanut boy is he? Hitch certainly has a way with words and I enjoy reading his point of view but his diatribes on atheism vs Christianity always leave me with two impressions. 1. He suffers from chronic depression and 2. I’m never quite sure who he’s trying to convince, himself or the reader.
repvoter on May 22, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Carter’s profound blindness continues to this day. In his darkness he has grown rancid with bitterness.
The Ritz on May 22, 2007 at 11:50 AM
But. . .but. . Jimmy Carter says YES!
I was in my mid and late-teens during the Carter administration. I can still remember on Carter’s Inaguration Day in 1977 that our city was digging out from a major snowstorm. Temperatures were at or below zero for a week. Our water pipes had frozen and we were trying anything and everyting to get them thawed.
So while Carter was taking the Oath of Office, I was pouring hot water from a kettle on the cover of our water meter seeing if that would cause a thaw enough to get water back to the house (we later found out that our water main from the street had frozen and burst open).
Still, the I’ve often thought that our inconvenience of being without water for two weeks somehow was a metaphor for the four years of the Carter administration.
Gottafang on May 22, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Carter went from being a mildly incompetent governor of a southern state to a spectacularly incompetent president, establishing the bases for virtually all the international turmoil still being felt thirty years later. He won the Nobel Peace Prize for building cheap houses for the poor.
If this was your legacy, wouldn’t you be bitter?
stonemeister on May 22, 2007 at 11:53 AM
Note to Rosie: Who was Christ “lusting for in his heart” like Jimmy Carter was?
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on May 22, 2007 at 12:06 PM
Heh, anyone who doesnt know the Carter rabbit story really needs to read it. Pure gold.
http://www.narsil.org/politics/carter/killer_rabbit.html
Dash on May 22, 2007 at 12:12 PM
That is an exellent question, more than you know.
The frustrating thing about so many conservatives giving liberals the benefit of the doubt is that such a belief is diametrically opposed with the fundamental conservative tenet of the immutability of human nature. Human beings are inherently and easily corruptible, and giving liberals the benefit of the doubt for “good intentions” causes conservatives to lose many battles with them before they are ever fought.
Outstanding post, Halley.
thirteen28 on May 22, 2007 at 12:12 PM
They are but a small price to pay for some exquisitely laid smack upon jimmy carter.
Kid from Brooklyn on May 22, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Nail….head….BAM!!
omnipotent on May 22, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Too many great comments to “Heh”, and too little time. Truly, Carter is low-hanging fruit, and truly, I hope I never piss off Hitchens in such a manner as to deserve public scrutiny, and truly, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, today, sort of.
But the money quote is Eugene McCarthy eviscerating Carter as likely the worst President in history, such that a full-throated liberal has no choice but to vote for Reagan.
Heh.
Jaibones on May 22, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Carter is a vile puss bag of a failed ex President.
Hilts on May 22, 2007 at 12:42 PM
By mere months I was too young to have voted for Carter, though I worked a phone for him for about three weeks. By the time of my 18th birthday, I was SO looking forward to voting for whoever ran against him. Jimmy Carter did as much to wake me up from the illusion of childhood liberalism as any living human. And then I got to vote for Ronaldus Magnus.
Who else remembers Dan Ayckroyd’s SNL send-up of the Carter fireside chat call-in session? He discusses technical details with a nuclear sub commander one moment, then an overdosing druggie calls in and Jimmy “talks him down”, including knowing every detail about the particularly shaped pills he took. Priceless.
William Amos, not to pick a nit, but Saddam’s Baath party coup was before 1970. He was the “vice president” until 1979, though it is commonly accepted that he was exercising supreme authority over the government well before then. He was the driving force behind the “restoration” of the ancient city of Babylon, which began well before he took over the top office. The torture rooms and public executions he ordered began long before 1979 as well.
Freelancer on May 22, 2007 at 12:59 PM
I was in the Naval task group off the gulf of Oman when Carter sent in ill-maintained helicopters to try a rescue of the hostages in Iran. After that Carter just sat there and let the US be shamed until Regan was elected adn the Iranians were so nervous at the prospect of having a Pres that might actually do something that the hostages were released almost before he took office. The Islamists had our number then, and they have our number now visa-vi Pelosi, Reed, etc.
Embarasement and shame at the results and dead special service members in ’79 aside, at the time we could anchor off the coast and go into Mombasa Kenya for liberty and feel safe enough to do it no problem. No way I would want to be a tourist anywhere in Kenya now, or for that matter Africa as a whole.
P. James Moriarty on May 22, 2007 at 1:03 PM
He only has a way with words after the 3rd drink….
Tim Burton on May 22, 2007 at 1:04 PM
If Jimmy is Christ-like I must be following in the footsteps of Satan…
Tim Burton on May 22, 2007 at 1:05 PM
Im lucky I turned 18 in 1980. My very first vote was FOR a fellow named Ronald Reagan
William Amos on May 22, 2007 at 1:11 PM
Here’s what I head from military insiders about Carter’s failed hostage rescue: his advisors told him that any rescue attempt would fail, and most scenarios would result in the deaths of all or many of the hostages.
Carter insisted on doing something so that he wouldn’t look impotent, so he ordered a plan that would result in zero hostage deaths, but relatively few military deaths. But he insisted that there must be military deaths, as sacrifice was called for.
So the plan was to send in a small contingency in poorly-maintained (i.e., vulnerable) helicopters, but to wait until there was a sandstorm in the area, then to vector those choppers directly into the sandstorm, with predictable results. I don’t know if this was true, but it sounded plausible.
stonemeister on May 22, 2007 at 1:11 PM
I still remember the scene on the TV show “Night Court” where the judge is trying to explain to a Russian lady who didn’t understand much english in a word or two what a bumbling, incompetent, WAY-out-of-touch, impotent person was like. He thought about it a second and said, “like Jimmy Carter”. She understood intantly.
P. James Moriarty on May 22, 2007 at 1:19 PM
Ooops…..instantly
P. James Moriarty on May 22, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Carter criticising Bush? Kinda like a cow turd complaining about the smell from the nearby dog turd, isn’t it?
Bush has turned out to be a disappointment, but we’re still feeling the repercussions of Carter’s ineptitude 30 years after he got the boot.
Hollowpoint on May 22, 2007 at 2:01 PM
For me Carter’s boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics pretty much symbolized the utter impotence of his Presidency. It was laughable that it would have any impact at all on Soviet policy in Afghanistan, and I’m sure the Russians did indeed laugh their asses off over it. The only people that the boycott penalized were the U.S. Olympic Team, hardworking Americans who’d spent the last four years training, only to have their opportunity to compete and represent their country snatched away by their own president. Now that’s leadership, Carter-style: help your enemies, hurt your own nation and people, and be an impotent laughingstock.
ReubenJCogburn on May 22, 2007 at 2:12 PM
So, William,
What’s your point (grin)
William
William2006 on May 22, 2007 at 2:37 PM
William
Born in 1962?
Same year as my wife.
You are young, young, young!
William
William2006 on May 22, 2007 at 2:41 PM
President Bush is trying to solve problems in the Middle East for which Carter bears most of the responsibility, yet Carter has the unmitigated gall to criticize Bush !!
Shortly after becoming President in 1977, Jimmy Carter launched a deliberate campaign to undermine the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlevi, a good friend and ally of the United States. The Shah of Iran fell from power as a result of Jimmy Carter’s withdrawal of support and Iran fell into the hands of the tyrannical and anti-American Ayatollah Khomeini. This was the key historical event which led to the terrorist supporting state of Iran as we know it today and that now threatens to develop nuclear weapons to destroy both America and Israel.
This was debatably the second worst U.S foreign policy “mistake” ever made by a United States President. The first, of course being Franklin Deleno Roosevelt’s give-away of all Eastern Europe to the fascist Joseph Stalin in the agreement at Yalta. This at the end of WWII after all the blood spilled by the Western Allies which successfully fought and won its freedom. While Jimmy Carter may have wanted to secure the top spot for worst betrayal of America, he failed at that too, because Roosevelt a fellow democrat, took actions at Yalta that are hard to beat.
But getting back to Jimmy, no one has mention the double digit inflation rate suffered by the American economy under his administration. Nor has anyone mentioned his manufactured “oil crisis of the seventies” that had people in long lines to put gasoline in their tanks. That was a total fraud foisted on the American people via Carter’s own executive order which prevented oil tankers from making deliveries to American ports. But of course the “oil crisis of the seventies” was immediately ended by President Ronald Reagan on the same day as his inauguration, by the stroke of a pen.
The more Carter talks, the more people remember the disaster that was Jimmy Carter, for his own benefit, he really needs to shut up.
Maxx on May 22, 2007 at 3:04 PM
I don’t know if anybody deserves the full Hitchens’ treatment. Let’s fact it, Hitchens is a rageoholic. When he writes, he writes to hurt, to wound the subject of his ire. I think it would be a good idea to rethink the conservative love given this man for his hachet job on left when we know he is full well capable of swinging away at conservatives especially when they are in anyway religious. All I am saying is that Hitchens is a bully and we don’t prove ourselves to be very brave when we cheer his verbal beating of the weaker kid just as long as we are spared.
P.S. Ann Coulter is wondering when she gets her bona fides back.
Bill C on May 22, 2007 at 3:08 PM
When Hitchens is right, he is right. I see no contradiction in applauding him when he is correct. Carter is a vile puss bag.
Hilts on May 22, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 11:12 AM
That was a clever statement! I’m with Kai – if Mr. Hitchens reads this he might savor writing one, to be delivered at the very curmugeony remembrance of his life (he would not call it a celebration). I believe he’d be very honest and self-deprecating. And witty to boot.
It’s no secret – I love Mr. Hitchens’ talent to write/gab and am happy we have him here, and on our side on many important issues.
Mr. Carter has stooped so low that he doesn’t deserve too much commentary, except that I liked his brother Billy better, and still wonder how on Earth this silly man ended up the president of this nation? Doesn’t that speak more for us than for him?
Can’t wait for Nonfactor to weigh in.
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 3:12 PM
And, how about a debate btw. Messrs Carter/Hitchens on the WoT? I’d pay for that.
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 3:13 PM
Bill C on May 22, 2007 at 3:08 PM
Jimmy Carter is hardly a “weaker kid”.
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 3:15 PM
What is it with the left and their fixation on whether or not other people are laughing at the US?
Didn’t their parents ever teach them that sometimes they’ll be laughed at even when they’re doing the right thing?
Osama could have saved himself some suicide bombers. You don’t have to just kill a few people to make America look like a paper tiger, all you have to do is let the Democrats hear you laughing at us.
Kensington on May 22, 2007 at 3:16 PM
It was during those years that I discovered conservatism.
I remember my father saying he’ll run the country like a business cause he’s a businessman. And he ran the country right into the ground…, with the rest of the peanuts.
I still run into people here that think he was the greatest president. Ever!
Kini on May 22, 2007 at 3:27 PM
If Hitch was beyotch, I’d ask him to be my Ho.
ronsfi on May 22, 2007 at 4:42 PM
I don’t think so. It seems to me that his smug attitude comes from how much better he thinks he is than the people he excoriates. Because of that, I think he would get indignant if someone did it to him, as a ‘what gives you the right?’ sort of thing.
Anyway, the biggest insult in the quote is when he implies that Jimmuh Cartah is a Christian. If he was a Christian, then the Rotund Oracle (not to be confused with the Goracle, of course) might have a point when she says that Christians are just as dangerous as Muslims.
Wolfman on May 22, 2007 at 8:23 PM
I can’t say that I enjoy watching a rabid case like Hitchens when he attacks ANY human being — even if the victim is a moonbat liberal like Jimmuh.
My collie says:
Easy for HIM to say. Hitchens would seem to represent something more of a moral dilemma — assuming that we already eliminated euthanasia as a proper and viable course of action for dealing with the poor fellow. It’s a pity that we have to let him suffer like that — if only there was some way to put him out of his misery. **sigh**
As for Jimmuh, the Bush administration said it best: Carter is now relevent? to what? and how?
CyberCipher on May 22, 2007 at 9:05 PM
Running atheism damage control because of what Hitchens said about Falwell, eh Allah? ;)
Darth Executor on May 22, 2007 at 9:57 PM
I was thinking more of mother teresa.
Bill C on May 23, 2007 at 2:32 AM
“Malaise forever.”
Had to toss that one out there, too. =P
ZK on May 23, 2007 at 9:22 AM