22 replies to this topic

[Papist]

I heard this while listening to a podcast. So, I googled it. Sure enough, Jimmy Carter outs Blessed John Paul II as a fundamentalist....among other things.

I was on the north lawn of the White House in October 1979 when a beaming Jimmy Carter welcomed Pope John Paul II to the Executive Mansion, the trademark presidential teeth amply displayed as the Baptist Sunday school teacher gave the 264th Bishop of Rome a two-handed handshake. All seemed sweetness and light. But not so, Carter avers. Now he says he had a harsh exchange over the “Pope’s perpetuation of the subservience of women,” after which the two locked horns on liberation theology. John Paul’s adherence to settled Catholic doctrine, Carter charges, made him a kind of “fundamentalist,” a category of Bad People who, Carter has written, “are often angry and sometimes resort to verbal or even physical abuse against those who interfere with the implementation of their agenda.”

http://www.firstthin...-and-theologian

[homeschoolmom]

Who gives a croutons about what Jimmy Carter thinks about anything anymore? Guy's just trying to create some kind of legacy for himself other than "Worst President of the 20th Century."

[USAirwaysIHS]

From wiki:
"Fundamentalism is the demand for a strict adherence to specific theological doctrines usually understood as a reaction against Modernist theology"
I'll take it.

[Papist]

Who gives a croutons about what Jimmy Carter thinks about anything anymore? Guy's just trying to create some kind of legacy for himself other than "Worst President of the 20th Century."

I take it his NIV bible commentary is not on your Amazon wish list.

[dominicansoul]

imho, this actually makes Pope John Paul II look very good....

[Hasan]

Who gives a croutons about what Jimmy Carter thinks about anything anymore? Guy's just trying to create some kind of legacy for himself other than "Worst President of the 20th Century."

I think he already has something of a legacy in brokering one of the most important diplomatic breakthroughs in the entire 20th century: the Camp David Accords

Edited by Hasan, 30 April 2012 - 02:02 PM.

[Papist]

imho, this actually makes Pope John Paul II look very good....

Excellent point. It's like Pelosi calling me a bad Catholic.

[homeschoolmom]

I take it his NIV bible commentary is not on your Amazon wish list.

That would be correct.

[CatherineM]

The first time I voted, I got to vote against him. Seems like a long time ago now.

[Brother Adam]

I think he already has something of a legacy in brokering one of the most important diplomatic breakthroughs in the entire 20th century: the Camp David Accords

Seems there is more work to do.

[Hasan]

Seems there is more work to do.

Um, it's really not the President's job to prevent vandalism. Jimmy Carter is hardly my favorite President but he bears tremendous responsibility for solving one of the most pressing geo-political problems in one of the most strategically vital parts of the world and he deserves credit for that.

[Skinzo]

John Paul II was Catholic, period. Adding "fundamentalist" to the mix is just Carter's way of continuing his "ad hominem" style of attacking those he disagrees with. I remember his 1980 campaign well in which he constantly attacked Reagan in the same fashion. Republicans must miss Jimmy Carter, he did so much to grow the party.
As to the Camp David accords, those have had a minimal effect on the Middle East nightmare which remains as difficult as ever.

S.

[Hasan]

As to the Camp David accords, those have had a minimal effect on the Middle East nightmare which remains as difficult as ever.

S.

On what planet is peace between Egypt and Israel a happening of minimal effect?

Edited by Hasan, 01 May 2012 - 05:01 PM.

[Mercy me]

On what planet is peace between Egypt and Israel a happening of minimal effect?

What peace? Are you referring to the period that ended with the "Arab Spring"? Actually, I will give Carter credit for the Camp David accords. It was nice while it lasted but the damage that Carter wrought on the foreign relations front has never been overcome. You need look no further than Iran.

[Skinzo]

I'm not going to spend much time on this, as it's pretty obvious. Peace? It's a pretty cold peace between Israel and Egypt. That was a deal between Sadat and Begin anyway, neither of which are any longer on the scene. Ancient history really. Moreover, Egypt is only one of the several Arab nations in the area. The whole area remains a tinder box capable of igniting at any time. Egyptians themselves never had any say in the "peace process" and it's anyone's guess how they feel now.
The Palestinian problem remains as intractable as ever.

S.

[Hasan]

What peace? Are you referring to the period that ended with the "Arab Spring"? Actually, I will give Carter credit for the Camp David accords. It was nice while it lasted but the damage that Carter wrought on the foreign relations front has never been overcome. You need look no further than Iran.

The Camp David accords are still in effect. And last time I checked Egypt and Israel are not at war. It is true that they are under strain. I'm not sure what you are talking about with Iran. Carter didn't cause the Revolution. They only thing I can think that you may be referring too would be the hostage crisis. There really wasn't much to be done there considering the disastrous rescue attempt that did occur. It did prompt major reform of the Special Forces.

Edited by Hasan, 01 May 2012 - 05:27 PM.

[Hasan]

I'm not going to spend much time on this, as it's pretty obvious. Peace? It's a pretty cold peace between Israel and Egypt.

Unlike before, when there was a half a century of periodic warfare between the two sides. Have you noticed that there haven't been a major regional war since David?

That was a deal between Sadat and Begin anyway, neither of which are any longer on the scene.

That applies to all treaties. The deal is still in place.

Ancient history really.

Really? Because Israel doesn't consider it ancient history. Considering their defense budget is structured around the deal. Egypt also doesn't consider it ancient history. The military establishment certainly doesn't.

Moreover, Egypt is only one of the several Arab nations in the area.

Yeah, the most powerful. Again, notice the absence of major regional wars since the Accords?

The whole area remains a tinder box capable of igniting at any time.

Not really. Not the way it was prior to David where major regional wars occurred numerous times in the course of four decades. Unlike after David when there were no major regional wars for the past three decades.

Egyptians themselves never had any say in the "peace process" and it's anyone's guess how they feel now.
The Palestinian problem remains as intractable as ever.

S.

Yeah. Israel's destructive and stupid policies in the OT's is a problem. However the occupation of a tiny piece of contested land between a state and a small people is pretty different from a major regional war between two major regional powers. It was particularly important at the time since the middle east wars were in many sences proxy wars between the US and USSR with the posability of nuclear exchange.

[Skinzo]

I gather you don't read much on the actual situation there: "Amr Moussa, the leading candidate in Egypt's presidential race, called the Camp David peace accords "dead and buried."
And:
"Meanwhile, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak called on Egypt to control the instability in the Sinai Peninsula in order to keep the peace between the two countries.
"We urge Egypt to contain the lawlessness in the Sinai Peninsula -- this is imperative in order to keep our two nations firmly on the path of peace," he said Monday during an address to the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem.
The unrest has grown since Mubarak was overthrown more than a year ago. The gas line running between Egypt and Israel has been attacked no less than 14 times, and terrorists have infiltrated into Israel from Sinai."

So much for nostalgia for the Camp David Accords.

http://www.jta.org/n...id-accords-dead

S.

[Mercy me]

The Camp David accords are still in effect. And last time I checked Egypt and Israel are not at war. It is true that they are under strain. I'm not sure what you are talking about with Iran. Carter didn't cause the Revolution. They only thing I can think that you may be referring too would be the hostage crisis.

Last I checked Egypt cut off fuel to Israel and their candidates are talking about war.

With Iran Carter very publicly undercut a loyal ally making the revolution possible. Let me spell it out, without Carter the Islamic Revolution in Iran would not have happened. As a result of the revolution a lot of people died, America lost an ally in Iran. Furthermore, the entire region, not a terribly stable region to begin with, was thrown into chaos.

The hostage crisis was nothing in the big scheme of things.

[Hasan]

Let me spell it out, without Carter the Islamic Revolution in Iran would not have happened.

Ok, I'm sorry. But you don't have any idea what you are talking about. Could Carter have put more pressure on the Shah to order his security services to be even more brutal is suppressing descent? Maybe. But at best you are arguing the possibility (and a faint one since the Shah was not afraid to bash heads to stay in power) that Carter could have encouraged an ally to peruse tactics that maybe would have beaten down a popular revolt. That's fairly unlikely as the Shah's position had been at best tenuous since Eisenhower's day (you know, the last time a Shah got kicked out by a popular revolt before we helped orchestrate his return via operation AJAX). You obviously have taken no time to understand the political history of Iran but have simply ingested some intellectual shallow talking points.