Jimmy Carter Slams Ted Kennedy on Health Care

[Bann]

I love it when they start eating their own. This feud has been going on for a long time & I guess Jimmah has had just about enough of keeping it all inside.

And what great timing - right before the elections! Democrats! The gift that keeps on giving!

"The fact is that we would have had comprehensive health care now, had it not been for Ted Kennedy's deliberately blocking the legislation that I proposed," he tells Stahl. "It was his fault. Ted Kennedy killed the bill," says Carter. And Kennedy, who then ran against the president for the democratic presidential nomination, did it out of spite says Carter. "He did not want to see me have a major success in that realm of life," he tells Stahl.

In a diary he kept during his presidency, Carter vents about Kennedy's attacks and criticizes Kennedy's own health care bill. The following entry is reprinted in Carter's new book, "White House Diary." "Kennedy continuing his irresponsible and abusive attitude, immediately condemning our health plan. He couldn't get five votes for his plan," Carter wrote.

Jimmy Carter Slams Ted Kennedy On Health Care - 60 Minutes - CBS News

 

[acommondisaster]

That weasel has been bitter since he lost re-election.

 

[ginwoman]

Isn't he too old to be worrying about this crap?

 

[chernmax]

Kick a man when he's down, six feet down!

 

[awpitt]

Interesting article for those who actually read the whole thing...


It interesting to note that our depedance on imported oil was cut in half during Carter's administration. Too bad that trend didn't continue during the years after Carter left office.

He normalized relations with China; brokered a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, deregulated railroads, trucking, airlines and telephones; and his energy conservation programs resulted in a 50 percent cut in imported oil, down to just 4.3 million barrels a day.

"Unfortunately, now we're probably importing 12 million barrels a day, since part of my energy policies were abandoned," Carter told Stahl.

 

[Toxick]

It interesting to note that our depedance on imported oil was cut in half during Carter's administration. Too bad that trend didn't continue during the years after Carter left office.

I know I'm not an expert - my age was in single-digits when Carter was president - so maybe I don't have all the facts... but I seem to remember something about gas-lines, energy-crises, fuel rationing and the like during Carter's administration, which is often sited as "Hell on Earth" by those who were there.



It's not really "cutting dependence on foreign oil" if the country plunges into raging ####ing chaos as a result.

 

[awpitt]

I know I'm not an expert - my age was in single-digits when Carter was president - so maybe I don't have all the facts... but I seem to remember something about gas-lines, energy-crises, fuel rationing and the like during Carter's administration, which is often sited as "Hell on Earth" by those who were there.



It's not really "cutting dependence on foreign oil" if the country plunges into raging ####ing chaos as a result.

The gas lines, etc. occurred in parts of the country for a period of time during Carter's term just as it did during Nixon's. The rationing meant that you could only buy gas on even or odd numbered days based on the if you had an odd or even numbered license plate.

I didn't say reducing dependance on imported oil is easy. Reducing depedance on anything is not easy; however, there would've been long term benfits that we'd be enjoying now if we, as a nation, had stuck to that effort back then.

 

[Mongo53]

Interesting article for those who actually read the whole thing...

It interesting to note that our depedance on imported oil was cut in half during Carter's administration. Too bad that trend didn't continue during the years after Carter left office.

But was that the result of Carter's Policies, or was it the result of OPEC's Policies that formed a cartel and limited the supply to the U.S.

It was Nixon's (you know that rabid right winger) and Carter's Socialist price controls that resulted in the long gas lines and rationing, but at least prices still went up anyway, huh? What is the aim of Health Care Reform again?

If liberals are so interested in ending depedance on imported oil, why do they make developing Domestic Oil so incredibly difficult, as a matter of policy?

 

[Toxick]

I didn't say reducing dependance on imported oil is easy.

My point is that enforcing reduced consumption is not the same thing as "reducing dependence". If you deprive your body of 50% of the water that it needs, you're not "reducing your body's dependence on water". All you're doing is killing yourself.

however, there would've been long term benfits that we'd be enjoying now if we, as a nation, had stuck to that effort back then.

Such as?

Cheaper gas? Maybe...
I can't think of anything else, though.

 

[Toxick]

If liberals are so interested in ending depedance on imported oil, why do they make developing Domestic Oil so incredibly difficult, as a matter of policy?

Excellent question.

 

[SamSpade]

Not mentioned of course is that GDP adjusted for inflation is about 2-3 times what it was during Carter's term. Kind of hard to pump out one fourth of the world's output with the same amount of oil as we did thirty years ago.

That was one of the worst interviews I've ever seen 60 Minutes do. I don't know how many times I wanted to say to the TV, do you two want to get a room? You'd have thought he was our greatest President who was just never appreciated properly.

 

[awpitt]

But was that the result of Carter's Policies, or was it the result of OPEC's Policies that formed a cartel and limited the supply to the U.S.

Both. OPEC's actions made Carter realize that we couldn't count on them anymore which is why he froze imports to 1977 levels and said that any new addition to demand for energy will be met from domestic production or through conservation.

If liberals are so interested in ending depedance on imported oil, why do they make developing Domestic Oil so incredibly difficult, as a matter of policy?

That's the problem with the liberals. They want us to move away from oil completely and maybe someday we might be able to but for now, we need to make it easier to get domestic sources of oil so we don't have to rely on the Middle-East.

 

[Larry Gude]

My point is that enforcing reduced consumption is not the same thing as "reducing dependence". If you deprive your body of 50% of the water that it needs, you're not "reducing your body's dependence on water". All you're doing is killing yourself.

I'm writing that one down!

 

[Larry Gude]

That's the problem with the liberals. They want us to move away from oil completely and maybe someday we might be able to but for now, we need to make it easier to get domestic sources of oil so we don't have to rely on the Middle-East.

There's nothing wrong with relying on foreign oil. The problem is their idea of what the price should be. If we have the ability to ramp up our own production then we make ourselves part of the cartel and part of the debate as to what oil should cost. THAT would be the benefit of ANWR being open along with revisiting old wells with new technology, OCS, etc, etc, etc.

Oil is a national security issue. We should treat it as such.

 

[Toxick]

I'm writing that one down!

Enjoy it.

 

[Mongo53]

Both. OPEC's actions made Carter realize that we couldn't count on them anymore which is why he froze imports to 1977 levels and said that any new addition to demand for energy will be met from domestic production or through conservation.




That's the problem with the liberals. They want us to move away from oil completely and maybe someday we might be able to but for now, we need to make it easier to get domestic sources of oil so we don't have to rely on the Middle-East.

Which nothing would develop and field alternative energy sources faster and more efficiently (read cheaply for the consumer) than letting the Free Market work it out.

Which, when you subvert the free market with price controls, windfall profit taxes, artificial limits on export/import and all sorts of other beaurcratic solutions, you may make some short term gain, but you end up hurting yourself more in the long run.

 

[Larry Gude]

Which nothing would develop and field alternative energy sources faster and more efficiently (read cheaply for the consumer) than letting the Free Market work it out.

Which, when you subvert the free market with price controls, windfall profit taxes, artificial limits on export/import and all sorts of other beaurcratic solutions, you may make some short term gain, but you end up hurting yourself more in the long run.

Oil is not a free market and has not been, ever. Standard Oil ring any bells?

Something that critical, that central, electricity, the military, the highways, need to be treated as a national interest.

 

[itsbob]

The gas lines, etc. occurred in parts of the country for a period of time during Carter's term just as it did during Nixon's. The rationing meant that you could only buy gas on even or odd numbered days based on the if you had an odd or even numbered license plate.

I didn't say reducing dependance on imported oil is easy. Reducing depedance on anything is not easy; however, there would've been long term benfits that we'd be enjoying now if we, as a nation, had stuck to that effort back then.

IF you could get gas based on what day you were allowed to get it.

Some stations even rationed how much you could buy, while others jacked the price to over $3 a gallon (when gas was selling for $.50 - 1.00 a gallon).. and a LOT of places in the US went a lot further than even odd days..

People that worked couldn't afford to sit in a gas line all day to get gas on the "allowed days"..

Speed limits were reduced, and in some states you didn't get a speeding ticket for doing 70 in a 55, but a "wasting fuel" ticket, and of course there was no way they could change all the signs overnight to 55MPH, so people were in kind of a no-man's land as to how fast they were allowed to go. The speed limet SUPPOSEDLY changed at midnight on a given day, but the signs still said 75MPH on the Interstate.

He raped the military, cancelling the M1 tank, the M3 Bradley, and even the F16 fighter.. then tried to invade Iran with unmaintained 30 year old equipment that cost a lot of lives, and couldn't understand why the mission wasn't a success. Of course he failed to mention any of the Iran circus during his interview..

I came into the Army at the VERY tail end of Carter. We didn't have any funds for fuel to train in our tanks.. We'd walk around open fields, a four man tank crew, holding on to each others web gear.. and "Simulate" driving a tank to do crew drills.

No money for spare parts, so on paper we looked like an all powerful Army, but in the most powerful Armored force the Army had at the time we were at less than 50% operational systems, and even less for crews/ manning. We'd go to our tank certifications and would hot swap crews from one tank to another to get them certified, and even tow dead tanks to the range, cannabilize parts from a working tank to get it certified, then strip the parts back off again and tow it home.

Yeah, Carter, a statesman to listen too..

 

[Mongo53]

Oil is not a free market and has not been, ever. Standard Oil ring any bells?

Agree with the first part Oil is NOT a free market. And from a Purist perspecitive, nothing in the U.S. is a Free Market, but from the common sense perspective, Oil has tipped the scale toward an Over Regulated and Limited Market that operates more on a Government Franchise than a free market, and that way long ago.

Just a NOTE, NOT to necessarily disagree with your point, but Standard Oil in a way is a good example of how a Monopoly is NOT necessarily NOT a free Market. When Standard Oil took over as a virtual Monopoly of the Oil Industry, the price of oil dropped to a fraction to what it was before, and far more available. The point is, a Monopoly that gets there by out competing all other companies and stays their by continuing to out-competing any new companies and remains efficient and responsive to the consumer is the Free Market still working. And what is wrong with a Monopoly if they still do it faster, better and cheaper than any other company?

You still have an argument that Standard Oil got there by Political Corruption, which if you look, any Monopoly people love to complain about, you'll find government behind it as the root cause of it being able to become a Monopoly.

 

[ImnoMensa]

Agree with the first part Oil is NOT a free market. And from a Purist perspecitive, nothing in the U.S. is a Free Market, but from the common sense perspective, Oil has tipped the scale toward an Over Regulated and Limited Market that operates more on a Government Franchise than a free market, and that way long ago.

Just a NOTE, NOT to necessarily disagree with your point, but Standard Oil in a way is a good example of how a Monopoly is NOT necessarily NOT a free Market. When Standard Oil took over as a virtual Monopoly of the Oil Industry, the price of oil dropped to a fraction to what it was before, and far more available. The point is, a Monopoly that gets there by out competing all other companies and stays their by continuing to out-competing any new companies and remains efficient and responsive to the consumer is the Free Market still working. And what is wrong with a Monopoly if they still do it faster, better and cheaper than any other company?

You still have an argument that Standard Oil got there by Political Corruption, which if you look, any Monopoly people love to complain about, you'll find government behind it as the root cause of it being able to become a Monopoly.

My savings account was paying 17% interest. It was pretty cool for those who had savings accounts, but hell on new home buyers.