On Thu, 05 May 2011 17:06:38 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 05 May 2011 13:46:22 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 05 May 2011 13:51:35 -0400, wrote:


So, therefore, someone who's proven to be incompetent, should be
believed.

Nobody questioned Blair's "competence". There was just a policy
disagreement about sharing intel with the French.
If you disagree with the CnC you have to go.

Huh? Lots and lots of people have. Good grief. Look it up!



You will have to cite that. I can certainly give you dozens of
examples of people who were fired for disagreeing with the president,
any president.

Try Google...

http://davidswanson.org/node/2443
http://www.rsm.ac.uk/media/pr222.php
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle15514.htm

For a start. As usual, you refuse to even look stuff up on your own.


Carter was evil and/or incompetent,

Yes, in DC terms he was incompetent. He did not understand how things
worked and did not really accomplish much.

even though
he got more done legislatively than just about any other president.

Huh? More than LBJ? More than Nixon? FDR?
You are going to have to explain that one.
Even Carter says his main achievement was Camp David

Huh... read up.... http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/car0bio-1


You must not have even read the article you cited. I saw no
significant legislative things there.
They talk a lot about the foreign policy things, mostly Camp David,
that I pointed out, Salt II and giving away the Panama canal.
That is nothing compared to FDR, LBJ or Nixon's LEGISLATIVE
accomplishments and that is what you were talking about.

Try again. This time read slower.

I did. Now enlighten us and quote the part I missed in that article.
Are you referring to the nebulous comments about reorganizing some
federal departments? That is executive, not legislative and was really
just changing some signs.

Enlighten yourself. You appear to need it.

You cited an article with absolutely ZERO references to legislative
achievements and now you are ducking the question with a personal
attack.

Try again. There are plenty listed.


Many of the Carter administration's most noteworthy accomplishments
came in the field of foreign affairs. President Carter established
full diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China and made
good on a long-standing American promise to return control of the
Panama Canal to the Panamanians. After negotiating the necessary
treaties with Panama, Carter prevailed in an exceptionally contentious
ratification fight in the Senate.

So he gave away the Panama canal. I gave you that.
That was not really legislative. The house was not involved at all.
He pushed a ratification through a democratically controlled Senate.
Not exactly the creation of the EPA/OSHA et al, the Civil Rights act
or the New Deal is it?


•Panama Canal treaties
•Camp David Accords
•treaty of peace between Egypt and Israel
•the SALT II treaty with the Soviet Union
•establishment of U.S. diplomatic relations with the People's Republic
of China
•comprehensive energy program conducted by a new Department of Energy
•deregulation in energy, transportation, communications, and finance
•educational programs under a new Department of Education
•environmental protection legislation, including the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act.

http://books.google.com/books?id=TNu...page&q&f=false

or

http://tinyurl.com/3qkjoux


The outstanding achievement of the Carter presidency was the peace
settlement between Israel and Egypt. Over 13 days of meetings at the
presidential retreat, Camp David, Carter persuaded President Anwar
Sadat of Egypt and Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel to end the
31-year state of war between their countries. Egypt was the first of
Israel's Arab neighbors to make peace with the Jewish state. Israel
ended its occupation of the Sinai peninsula and returned control of
the territory to Egypt.

That was not Legislative in any sense.

President Carter also negotiated a Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty
(SALT II) with the Soviet Union, but before the Senate could vote to
ratify the treaty, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan and Carter
withdrew the treaty from consideration. The two superpowers agreed
informally to abide by the terms of the treaty, even though neither
side ever ratified it officially.

The Senate "could not vote..."

How is that a "legislative accomplishment?

It certainly does not rise to the level of "he got more done
legislatively than just about any other president" ... Your assertion.

Still waiting

Wait no longer.