• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Was Jimmy Carter less anti-market than Reagan?

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
Reagan's deficits were higher despite more tax revenue and despite more regulations to increase the price of things which would increase the tax base. Reagan was the most pro-regulatory President since FDR. Carter favored deregulation. Reagan lied to get Americans killed in a military conflict while Carter did not. Reagan did not end the Cold War, but he took credit for its end anyway. He may have extended it (I haven't read the SALT Treaty, but I think that he made sure there was some loophole in it). Reagan was anti-alcohol, Carter was not. Reagan increased the drug war and increased the power of the IRS with people like Michele Bachmann. His IRS had the conservative U.S. Rep. Hansen jailed without complete due process. Reagan supported one of the most authoritarian U.S. Senators ever and he would not have won without Reagan's support. Reagan welcomed neoconservatives into his party. He may have had Austro-Jeffersonian Democrat Larry McDonald (who, along with Dr. Paul, fully adhered to the principles of the Old Right) assassinated.

Reagan was a protectionist, Jimmy Carter was not. Reagan did very little to limit abortion. When he was Governor, he supported it. Calling Reagan a conservative is like calling Obama a flaming liberal.

Finally, Reagan replaced P Volcker with Greenspan because Greenspan was more pro-inflation, while P Volcker was closer to being an Austrian.

What good did Reagan do for libertarians? All I can think of is that he raised the national speed limit (although he abolished it).

I'm not saying Carter was a good President, but I don't think he hated Laissez-faire capitalism as much as Reagan did. If you disagree, then let me know why.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
Jimmy Carter was beyond question one of the best Presidents we ever had. This is why the brain dead hold him in contempt. All notions of what it means to be a great man must be destroyed in a country via brainwashing by powerful money mafia interests to insure such folk are never elected. Your question on market friendliness, however, has little to do with anything. Reagan was a simpleton. This is my opinion on your thread. It is only an opinion offered without proof. What possible proof can one offer to folk who disagree if in fact their brains are not capable of seeing? The only way to know is to discover a test to determine who is programmed and who is not and the moment that test is perfected and known to exist all evidence for it will be killed. Just look how Freud is doing. Almost no recognition of the fact of unconscious motivation in todays world is admitted, the most important discovery about the human mind in history, almost unrecognized.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,211
126
Carter got hit because of inflation, but much of that was fallout from price and wage controls. Regan was the Obama of the reps.
 
Jun 19, 2004
24,142
1,586
126
Jimmy Carter was beyond question one of the best Presidents we ever had. This is why the brain dead hold him in contempt. All notions of what it means to be a great man must be destroyed in a country via brainwashing by powerful money mafia interests to insure such folk are never elected. Your question on market friendliness, however, has little to do with anything. Reagan was a simpleton. This is my opinion on your thread. It is only an opinion offered without proof. What possible proof can one offer to folk who disagree if in fact their brains are not capable of seeing? The only way to know is to discover a test to determine who is programmed and who is not and the moment that test is perfected and known to exist all evidence for it will be killed. Just look how Freud is doing. Almost no recognition of the fact of unconscious motivation in todays world is admitted, the most important discovery about the human mind in history, almost unrecognized.
There are several ways to read your post. I choose the perspective that Jimmy Carter is a great and good man who should never have been President. He was no statesman.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
There are several ways to read your post. I choose the perspective that Jimmy Carter is a great and good man who should never have been President. He was no statesman.
One would think being a great and good man states everything about a man.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
16,928
2,330
126
One would think being a great and good man states everything about a man.
The problem is it's an opinion, not a fact. Personally, I think Carter was one of the worst presidents we've ever had, though he's probably the best ex president we've ever had.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
The problem is it's an opinion, not a fact. Personally, I think Carter was one of the worst presidents we've ever had, though he's probably the best ex president we've ever had.
Carter was a lot less worse for pro-market people than any of the asssholes who succeeded him to date. The reason the economy was so bad was because of the price and wage fixing by Nixon and the Federal Reserve, although he may (I'm not sure) have chosen G Bill Miller to be Fed chairman. Still, Carter was less pro-inflation than Reagan was.

Reagan didn't do anything acceptable for libertarians other than raise the speed limit (although like everything else, it should be left up to the States). Reagan, Greenspan, and Milton Friedman also helped the Kochtopus handcuff the paleo-libertarian movement which may have been why he was put up.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
The problem is it's an opinion, not a fact. Personally, I think Carter was one of the worst presidents we've ever had, though he's probably the best ex president we've ever had.
This is the result of viewing him politically and objectively as if he were different people. The man you see is the President I see.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
16,928
2,330
126
This is the result of viewing him politically and objectively as if he were different people. The man you see is the President I see.
From my point of view, he is two different people. I honestly believe that Carter was an honest man that always tried to do what he saw as the right thing. I respect that, I respect the system of values he apparently lived by. He is what I would call a good man. As a president, I don't think he had the personal strength for the job, he didn't have the fundamental belief in himself that marks the difference between a president and a leader.
We've had lots of Presidents, and damn few leaders.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Carter, Reagan any president or candidate can't get to the presidency with out the support of the people who really know them... Who have sat and listened to the passion flow from their mind to their mouth and into the room... That is what leaders do.. they motivate people with their ideas and passion. But they are all different and with differing ideas about priorities and methods.
Getting to the White House is proof of the dedication to the objective and the belief that that is the right way to do things... held by those who can't do it themselves but will work tirelessly to see that their choice makes it...
We can't know Carter or Reagan but we can get a feeling about who they are by looking at what bits of passion are present in actions... a glimpse only...
Carter seems to apply a more reasoned approach to what he tried to accomplish... Camp David Accords... Talk and talk and try to sway...
Reagan on the other hand was just as passionate but willing to violate law to accomplish his goals... The Contra affair...
Reagan had willing helpers cuz they like him thought the law didn't matter if the quest was right.
Carter did not apparently operate that way...

So who is better? I suggest the humble penut farmer from Georgia over the actor who'd swear to uphold my Constitution one day and violate it the next...

Maybe Reagan slept while the document burned... and maybe Carter could have taken more risks... I don't know. I'd rather a friend like Carter than a President like Reagan...
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,211
126
Maybe Reagan slept while the document burned... and maybe Carter could have taken more risks... I don't know. I'd rather a friend like Carter than a President like Reagan...
I'd rather have Carter than either choice we have today, but then we should expect poor choices.

This was posted in another thread to show Republican extremism.



The premise of the statement is not what struck me but the difference between the two. For the part of the Dems they have been moving away too, "extreme" but not as sharply defined. Look at the period when Carter was in office. That was when cooperation was possible and when Carter could have been President. Neither party would have him now.

This is the original source of the graph. The site doesn't have just one nor is it called "Republican extremism, it's Polarized America.

Look at this- The House



The Senate




We earned our inability to function. Neither past President would suit our partisan masters now.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
This is why you aren't taken seriously on this forum.
Did you think it's news to me that conservative brain defectives don't know what serious means. But of course you can't really defend your point of view, you can only spout it as if you knew, because what you are infected with is truthiness. You were damaged before you could think so none of this is your fault but I'll help you as I can.

Strive to prove the garbage you were loaded up with and when you notice you can't you'll have taken an important step. The truth I know that you do not, is that we don't know anything. You believe in imbecility and I no longer do. We are no different at all except you are full of shit. What you fail to see is that you fell in love with it. Seriousness is a punch that puts a hole in the bottom of your shit cup and lets it drain away. Remember, what you see in me is the truth about yourself you are terrified to see. To you I am a monster but to me you are a fellow traveler who ran off the road in a ditch. You aren't lost because the road is right here. You are standing on the X but the map in your head tells you you are lost. Burn your worthless map, my friend.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
16,928
2,330
126
Did you think it's news to me that conservative brain defectives don't know what serious means. But of course you can't really defend your point of view, you can only spout it as if you knew, because what you are infected with is truthiness. You were damaged before you could think so none of this is your fault but I'll help you as I can.

Strive to prove the garbage you were loaded up with and when you notice you can't you'll have taken an important step. The truth I know that you do not, is that we don't know anything. You believe in imbecility and I no longer do. We are no different at all except you are full of shit. What you fail to see is that you fell in love with it. Seriousness is a punch that puts a hole in the bottom of your shit cup and lets it drain away. Remember, what you see in me is the truth about yourself you are terrified to see. To you I am a monster but to me you are a fellow traveler who ran off the road in a ditch. You aren't lost because the road is right here. You are standing on the X but the map in your head tells you you are lost. Burn your worthless map, my friend.
It's a real pity we can't have a single discussion in P&N without this sort of nonsense.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
It's a real pity we can't have a single discussion in P&N without this sort of nonsense.
Not my fault. What is there to discuss when you claim something is a pity but can't bother to discuss why you think so but just utter it as a fact. I find people like you and Matt to be pitiful. You just shit and leave it. What's to discuss other than the fact you can't think? You don't like what I say, tough fucking shit. You don't say anything. You just say what you don't like as if that meant something. If you want to try to stick your truthiness up my ass you'll just have to get used to the fact that I'll show you what you do.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
I'd rather have Carter than either choice we have today, but then we should expect poor choices.

The premise of the statement is not what struck me but the difference between the two. For the part of the Dems they have been moving away too, "extreme" but not as sharply defined. Look at the period when Carter was in office. That was when cooperation was possible and when Carter could have been President. Neither party would have him now.

This is the original source of the graph. The site doesn't have just one nor is it called "Republican extremism, it's Polarized America.



We earned our inability to function. Neither past President would suit our partisan masters now.
I've had to think about the graphs, the statements, and the affects the conclusions, if true, have or will have.

My first thought is what drives what. Is the polarization, which I don't think can be denied, something that the population creates as a normal cycle of the pendulum. Do both sides ride on it as it appears they do or is this phenomenon actually a move predicated on some universal constant like religion. A search for a consistency between government and religion maybe. I think the people create the polarization and government reflects this and it is not a ride that will move back but, rather, an effort to force the higher morality of religion upon all citizens and by virtue of this move the pendulum is tossed.

The above then answers the question of Reagan nor Carter would fit in today's White House because the slot don't exist where their passion might be appreciated.

Then Secondly, when I see a SCOTUS all seeing the same simple case bu their decisions are very polarized.... and they're suppose to use Stare Decisis so how can they move so far apart.
Congress is moving and the left is moving to the Right and I think mainly to get elected.
The Presidency is moving Right as well... or so it seems... but, the current fellow can't do diddly without Congress so he's forced Right... I think.

What that means to me is there is a concerted effort afoot... An Agenda that was unspoken until recently. An internal bloodless revolution to create the US into a Christian Nation.
Every sign I see points that way... Voter registration issues and legislation by the States to move toward a more Godly society. Even the way the Right views protests and support for the very greed that stimulated the protests seems directed and constant.

The news media use to be Cronkitish. You could listen to him and get the feeling the truth was being presented but now you have polarized news. I don't think a fair and balanced News exists. And what amazes me is folks use Fox or MSNBC to prove something... We don't know what truth is ever now a days and we are so far removed from the issue we can't begin to know independently... So we simply float on the cork and where it goes we go with out any regard to what is creating the wind.

You may think I'm cynical and maybe I am.. One thing for sure came from the mouth of the candidates.... Especially Santorum. Could you imagine Kennedy trying to be elected with that dialog... Was his speech in Virginia about he'd not have the Pope running things... and today we have almost exactly that as the platform of the Right and to some extent even Obama claims his Christianity is important to be President.... Amazing!
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Did you think it's news to me that conservative brain defectives don't know what serious means. But of course you can't really defend your point of view, you can only spout it as if you knew, because what you are infected with is truthiness. You were damaged before you could think so none of this is your fault but I'll help you as I can.

Strive to prove the garbage you were loaded up with and when you notice you can't you'll have taken an important step. The truth I know that you do not, is that we don't know anything. You believe in imbecility and I no longer do. We are no different at all except you are full of shit. What you fail to see is that you fell in love with it. Seriousness is a punch that puts a hole in the bottom of your shit cup and lets it drain away. Remember, what you see in me is the truth about yourself you are terrified to see. To you I am a monster but to me you are a fellow traveler who ran off the road in a ditch. You aren't lost because the road is right here. You are standing on the X but the map in your head tells you you are lost. Burn your worthless map, my friend.
Whatever pal, you are the one who thinks Carter was one of the greatest when he consistently ranks as one of the worst.

“To you I am a monster but to me you are a fellow traveler who ran off the road in a ditch.” Sorry, I am not the one running around thinking the other side is retarded.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,719
3,528
126
Whatever pal, you are the one who thinks Carter was one of the greatest when he consistently ranks as one of the worst.

“To you I am a monster but to me you are a fellow traveler who ran off the road in a ditch.” Sorry, I am not the one running around thinking the other side is retarded.
No, you're the side who thinks the others are monsters. And you aren't retarded, you're lost at home plate thinking the catcher pitches the ball.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY